A hard test for X’s transparency pledge in India

On August 15, Elon Musk announced that X would now clearly disclose any censorship required by governments. Instead of quietly ignoring legal demands, the platform would inform users when a government requested removal, name the agency, and disclose legal grounds where possible. However, Indian officials responded swiftly on August 18, stating that X would have to comply with Indian laws, particularly orders issued under Section 69A, which remain confidential.

The core issue lies in Rule 16 of the Information Technology (Blocking) Rules, 2009, which mandates strict confidentiality regarding all requests and actions taken. This confidentiality prevents X from publishing the required transparency, contradicting Musk's claim. The consequences of non-compliance are severe, with Section 69A potentially leading to criminal liability, including up to seven years in prison.

Despite Musk's promises, the platform's mechanism does not yet provide the transparency X claims. The "Under the Hood" feature, released with the "Phoenix" recommendation code, only shows selected users selected visibility labels on their accounts, not the underlying government request. Additionally, a significant number of Indian takedowns no longer go through Section 69A, making it difficult for X to disclose such information even if it wished to.

Despite its branding as a free-speech advocate, X has complied with 83 to 99 percent of demands. In July 2025, X blocked 2,355 accounts at the government's request within an hour, later restoring them following public outcry. The Karnataka High Court recently dismissed X's challenge to the Sahyog portal, calling it an "instrument of public good."

Until a court intervenes, the platform's transparency pledge appears to be at odds with Indian laws and the ruling establishment.