1. Big Tech’s Contempt for Indian Public Health
UPSC Relevance: GS-II (Governance, Health), GS-III (Cybersecurity, Economy), GS-IV (Ethics)
Core Argument: The editorial critically examines the blatant and routine violations by major American ‘Big Tech’ platforms (like Google and Meta) of Indian drug advertising laws, particularly the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954 (DMRA). It argues that these global technology companies display a double standard, strictly adhering to stringent regulations in the United States while demonstrating contempt and indifference towards public health laws in India.
- The Issue: The DMRA prohibits the advertisement of drugs for a specified list of diseases and disorders (like certain cancers, diabetes, and sexual disorders) under the guise of magical remedies, to prevent public exploitation. However, Big Tech’s platforms, leveraging their scale and targeting algorithms, routinely host and profit from such misleading, scientifically unproven, and often dangerous advertisements targeting vulnerable Indian consumers.
- Institutional Weakness: The article attributes this impunity to the structural and institutional weaknesses in India’s regulatory framework. Unlike the US, where regulatory bodies like the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have a history of imposing massive fines and taking strong legal action against companies, the enforcement mechanism in India is fragmented, slow, and lacks the necessary digital-era teeth. The existing penalty under the DMRA is nominal and not a deterrent for multi-billion dollar corporations.
- Digital Sovereignty and Ethics: This situation raises profound questions of digital sovereignty and corporate ethics. The companies’ argument of being mere ‘intermediaries’ providing a platform is seen as a deliberate legal evasion to escape responsibility for content that generates significant revenue. The lack of proactive self-regulation and failure to implement globally followed content moderation standards specifically for Indian public health laws is highlighted as an ethical lapse (GS-IV).
- Way Forward for UPSC: The editorial calls for urgent legal reform in India. This includes revisiting the DMRA to impose penalties proportional to the financial capacity and revenue of the violating Big Tech platforms. Furthermore, there is a need to strengthen the regulatory capacity of bodies like the Central Drugs Standard Control Organisation (CDSCO) to effectively monitor and prosecute digital violations, potentially by creating a dedicated Digital Health Advertising Monitoring Unit with expertise in algorithmic accountability. This is essential for protecting the public from medical misinformation and ensuring Big Tech’s accountability (GS-II).
2. A Start for North-South Carbon Market Cooperation
UPSC Relevance: GS-II (International Relations, Groupings), GS-III (Environment, Economy)
Core Argument: This editorial focuses on the emerging complexities and potential of aligning the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) with the developing Indian carbon market, particularly India’s Carbon Credit Trading Scheme (CCTS). It suggests that while the linkage is significant for global climate action, key geopolitical and economic challenges remain.
- CBAM and its Contradictions: CBAM, an EU levy on carbon-intensive imports, is intended to prevent “carbon leakage” (companies moving production to countries with lax climate policies). The editorial acknowledges its environmental intent but highlights its geopolitical contradictions, as it is perceived by developing nations, including India, as a protectionist trade barrier rather than a purely climate measure. It risks imposing a ‘double penalty’ on Indian exporters—once through the domestic CCTS and again via the CBAM.
- Structural Weakness of CCTS: For the CBAM-CCTS linkage to work, the editorial points out the structural weakness in the fledgling Indian carbon market. Unlike the EU Emission Trading System (EU ETS), which has a two-decade track record with strict emission caps, robust auction mechanisms, and independent verification, India’s system is fragmented and still experimental. This lack of a mature, credible, and unified carbon price in India is the primary hurdle to securing CBAM exemptions for Indian firms.
- The Need for Cooperation: Despite the challenges, the linkage holds transformative potential. It could push India’s industries towards greener production methods and accelerate the domestic transition to a low-carbon economy. However, this requires a shift from a confrontational stance to one of cooperation and technical alignment.
- Way Forward for UPSC: The immediate path forward involves India undertaking structural reforms of its CCTS to ensure its carbon price is demonstrably equivalent and non-discriminatory to the EU’s. This includes enhancing transparency, strengthening monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) systems, and potentially consolidating the fragmented market. Geopolitically, the editorial suggests a need for a “Cooperative Future” where developed nations like the EU offer technical assistance and financial support to developing countries like India to facilitate this transition, rather than just imposing tariffs. The debate underscores the conflict between Developed vs. Developing Nation responsibilities under climate action (GS-II & GS-III).
