Introduction

The rise of social media platforms has fundamentally altered the landscape of public discourse, raising complex questions about free speech in the digital age. This has fundamentally changed the scenery of public conversations due to the advent of social media platforms, posing difficult and intricate queries regarding freedom of speech within the digital era. The blurring between private and public spaces as Internet companies take on an unmatched role in controlling online communication is what will be deliberated upon in this paper. It also investigates social media speech from a legal viewpoint while looking at the clash between platform autonomy and user rights. Our focus is on some key court decisions, legislation efforts, and policy debates that shape their development framework for online expression. Accordingly, we examine how delicate the balance should be struck between promoting open dialogue and curbing harmful content, as this article seeks to explain the challenges associated with reconciling constitutional protections with modern realities of digital communication. The India Against Corruption movement (2011),[1] The Net Neutrality movement (2015),[2] These movements demonstrate how mass mobilization through social media leads to rapid dissemination of information and organization of protests. The new kinds of social networks that have come up as a result of these social media-driven movements have caused renewed interest among scholars studying contemporary forms of social movements. The text focuses on examining whether there is any relationship between social media use by activists and efficiency levels attained during different types of protest actions. Social media’s arrival has changed the landscape of public conversations, raising difficult and complex questions about freedom of speech in the digital age. This paper examines this blurring of public/private spaces as internet corporations assume an unmatched role over online communication. It also explores the legal aspects of social media speech while examining conflicts between platform autonomy and user rights. In doing so, we will examine some key court cases, legislative initiatives, and policy discussions that influence their architecture for online expression. Thus we explore how delicate a balance needs to be achieved to encourage open discussion while curbing harmful contents, as this article argues on the challenges facing protection of the constitution in today’s reality of digital communication. The scholars interested in contemporary forms of social movement would then become more curious when these recent popular uprisings occurred throughout modern global society, leading to the emergence of new kinds of virtual communities.

[1]Contributors, wikipedia (2024) 2011 Indian anti-corruption movement, Wikipedia. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Indian_anti-corruption_movement (Accessed: 13 August 2024).

[2]Contributors, wikipedia (2024) 2011 Indian anti-corruption movement, Wikipedia. Available at:   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Indian_anti-corruption_movement (Accessed: 13 August 2024).