Instagrams Takedown of Digital Rights Groups Post Exposes Metas Politics of Censorship

New Delhi: On September 17, digital rights organisation Software Freedom Law Center (SFLC) said that technology conglomerate Meta had restricted in India its Instagram post that dealt with the recent censorship faced by digital fact-checking outlet Alt News regarding on a story about the teaser of a film. This is only the latest in a series of restrictions affecting news organisations, journalists and political commentators on Meta’s platforms in India. But SFLC says the problem does not end with content being taken down.

The Wire can confirm that as of September 21, the post is still unavailable in India. Instagram's statement, on opening the link, says that it took this action in “pursuant to legal requirements under India's Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules”.

SFLC says that following takedowns, users also face significant hurdles in challenging the decisions, particularly when restrictions are imposed through automated systems.

In the Instagram post, the SFLC had highlighted the restrictions Alt News had faced due to its reporting on the teaser of the Hindi film Chauhaan. The SFLC's post referred to the Alt News report, in which it had documented the repeated removal of its Instagram post analysing the film’s teaser.

Alt News had uploaded three versions of the post. The first was removed because it contained visuals of pellet injuries in Kashmir. A second version, with modified visuals, was also taken down. A third version remained online after references to Hizbul Mujahideen militant Burhan Wani were removed from it. Alt News also reported that searches for “Burhan Wani” on Instagram produced no results and instead displayed a warning that the terms could be associated with “socially sensitive content”.

SFLC’s September 17 post contained five slides, three of which referred to Wani. Those three slides were subsequently restricted in India, while the remaining two continued to be visible, the organisation said. The same post, shared on X, continues to be visible in India.

The instances of takedowns faced by @AltNews show that opaque censorship regimes exist within platforms. This form of censorship can operate even without a formal government order.

If journalists know that certain subjects, images, words, or forms of reporting may trigger… pic.twitter.com/6P2JKhBZSq

— SFLC.in (@SFLCin) September 17, 2026

The notifications that SFLC received from Instagram all said same thing – that the content had been restricted through “automated systems implemented pursuant to legal requirements”. However, according to SFLC, Meta did not provide enough information to establish if the restriction followed a specific government or law-enforcement request or was imposed by Meta itself as part of its compliance with India’s Information Technology Rules.

The notifications SFLC received from Meta on Instagram.

Further, when SFLC's Instagram story sharing the Alt News report was also taken down.

The notification SFLC received from Meta regarding their Instagram story.

The incident follows a series of restrictions reported by Indian news organisations in recent months, against a broader backdrop of concerns over internet freedom in India.

Notably, Freedom House has continued to classify India as “Partly Free” in its latest 'Freedom on the Net' assessment, with a score of 51/100, citing restrictions on online content, website blocking and pressure on users and digital media.

The Wire has also reported repeated restrictions on its content. In August, it reported that posts by journalists, politicians, media organisations and political commentators had been withheld or removed, often without clear explanations. The Wire itself had faced restrictions on posts concerning, among other things, a US court hearing involving Nikhil Gupta and alleged Chinese encroachment in Arunachal Pradesh. It had also reported that Meta removed two of its reports from Facebook and Instagram in July.

On August 6, former Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal said Meta had restricted his Instagram account in India. He said he had repeatedly sought an explanation from the company but received no response.

In the past, Meta has described at least some high-profile restrictions as operational errors. In August, Meta’s chief global affairs officer Joel Kaplan apologised after a post by Prime Minister Narendra Modi was briefly restricted, with the company saying the restriction was the result of an operational error. The contrast has drawn attention because journalists and other users whose content has been restricted say they have often struggled to obtain comparable explanations.

SFLC’s latest concern is what happens after a takedown. The organisation runs a 24/7 digital rights helpline, RightsLine, which provides pro bono legal assistance in cases including content takedowns and account restrictions.

Based on complaints it has handled and its own attempts to challenge restrictions, SFLC says Meta’s official Grievance Officer intake form does not provide a method to report content takedowns, including those attributed to violations of Meta’s Community Standards, Terms of Service or “automated systems implemented under legal requirements”.

Instead SFLC has, in a statement, detailed how that Meta’s AI support assistant directs users to email the resident Grievance Officer.

According to the organisation, Meta’s website states that the email address can be used to make enquiries about the grievance redressal mechanism, but not to file a Grievance Officer report.

“This creates additional friction for users seeking to challenge takedowns and, in the case of news reporting, can limit journalists’ ability to disseminate information for significant periods of time,” the organisation said, adding, “It also creates a structural barrier to accessing further remedies, including the Grievance Appellate Committee, where filing a Grievance Officer report is a prerequisite for filing an appeal.”

SFLC views the issue beyond Meta’s automated systems incorrectly restricting legitimate reporting, the real problem for them is whether users have a meaningful way to contest those decisions once they occur.

The organisation has called on the Mark Zuckerberg-led company to restore its restricted posts and explain the legal basis for the action. It has also sought meaningful human oversight of automated restrictions and an effective and timely mechanism for users to challenge erroneous takedowns.

SFLC has further called on the government to provide greater transparency about the legal and policy basis for restrictions, including whether particular blocks result from government or law-enforcement requests or from Meta’s own systems.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.