New Delhi, October 22: The government has shot off a stern letter to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, conveying its strong disapproval over misrepresentation of the Indian map, and asserted that any attempt by the micro-blogging platform to disrespect the country's sovereignty and integrity is totally unacceptable.
In a strongly-worded letter, IT Secretary Ajay Sawhney has warned the platform that such attempts not only bring disrepute to Twitter but also raises questions about its neutrality and fairness as an intermediary. Twitter Statement on 'Jammu and Kashmir in China' Controversy: Worked Swiftly to Resolve Geotag Issue.
IT Ministry sources told PTI that Sawhney shot off a stern letter to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, conveying strong disapproval of the government over misrepresentation of map of India. Earlier, Twitter had shown geo-location of Leh in Jammu and Kashmir, People's Republic of China. The IT secretary, in his letter, has reminded Twitter that Leh is the headquarter of Union Territory of Ladakh and both Ladakh as well as Jammu and Kashmir are integral and inalienable parts of India, governed by the Constitution of India. Twitter Shows Jammu And Kashmir as Part of China When Users Search For Hall of Fame, Leh; Netizens Including Security Analyst Complain Online.
IT Secretary Ajay Sawhney Writes Letter to Jack Dorsey:
Electronics & IT Ministry Secretary, Ajay Sawhney, writes to Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey conveying strong disapproval of Govt over misrepresentation of India's map
It mentions that such attempts not only bring disrepute to Twitter but also raise questions on its neutrality, fairness https://t.co/G5e0iVwmTf
— ANI (@ANI) October 22, 2020
The government had asked Twitter to respect the sensitivities of Indian citizens, and has also made it clear that any attempt by Twitter to disrespect sovereignty and integrity of India, which is also reflected by the maps, is totally unacceptable and unlawful. Issuing a stern warning, the IT secretary has said that such attempts not only bring disrepute to Twitter but also raises questions about its neutrality and fairness as an intermediary.