The Pulse | Politics | South Asia

Indian Government Cracks Down on Video Reels Lampooning PM Modi

Authorities took down a video that mocked Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s undignified behavior while meeting foreign leaders.

India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi with Elon Musk, owner of X, at a meeting in Blair House in Washington D.C., on Feb. 13, 2025.

On March 18, a parody video reel that had garnered 16 million views on Instagram was suddenly blocked to viewers in India. The reel by stand-up comedian @hunnywhoisfunny, aka Pulkit Mani, satirized Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s overzealous behavior when meeting foreign dignitaries and foreigners. In the reel, Mani mimicked Modi’s habits while meeting foreign leaders during official state visits, including his embarrassing body hugging of these leaders, his guffaws and unintelligible speech. It went viral on social media.

The reel was then suddenly taken down by the platform with a formal notice that said: “Withheld in response to a legal demand” by the Government of India.

Also on March 18, dozens of other parody and satire accounts were blocked, citing “Request (of takedown) is based on local laws.” Some of those blocked on X (formerly Twitter) were handles like @Nehr_who, @DrNimoYadav, @DuckKiBaat, @mrjethwani — all extremely popular political satire and parody accounts — and @ActivistSandeep, the handle of journalist-cum-activist Sandeep Singh. Each of these handles post sharp, insightful political satire. From targeting Modi on his educational qualifications to India’s mishandling of the Israel-U.S. war on Iran, the consequent LPG shortage in the country to the mistreatment of India’s religious minorities – all of these subjects are fodder for political satire.

Angry at this digital censorship, netizens lambasted the Modi government for misusing the Information Technology Act (IT) Act 2000 to muzzle free speech and censor any criticism of Modi.

Since 2014, when Modi became India’s prime minister, his Hindu majoritarian regime has become increasingly authoritarian and intolerant of criticism and dissent.

On March 19, Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF), the non-profit organization advocating for digital rights and free speech in India, issued a statement on the “Alarming Escalation of Social Media Censorship and Proposed Expansion of Takedown Powers under the IT Act.”  The statement pointed out that “little or no explanation” had been provided for the take-down order. The IFF further said that it appears the take-down orders are targeting speech that is “political, satirical, or critical rather than clearly unlawful.” It urged the government to provide “timely notice, clear grounds for avenues for remedy” in the interest of transparency. The IFF offered to assist anyone who had faced such online censorship and help them challenge it legally.

In an editorial, The Hindu newspaper criticized the government crackdown. “A person’s entire account being blocked amounts to a digital exile, removing the person from the public square, which is a hallmark of an authoritarian government rather than of a liberal democracy,” it said.

Platforms like X, Instagram, and Facebook are required to comply with the government’s “legal demands” in keeping with section 69(A) of the IT Act 2000, which enables the government to block online content to protect the sovereignty, integrity, national security or public order. The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), which orders these takedowns, has not forwarded any such reasons behind the recent spate of crackdowns. Failure to comply with these emergency blocking orders can result in seven years’ imprisonment and a fine. It’s not surprising that the social media platforms enforce the takedown without assessing the legality of the demand.

In a high-handed move in February this year, the Modi government further tightened its leash on free speech. From the existing 24 to 36 hours takedown window, it is now mandated that platforms have to take down content within three hours. These changed rules came into effect on February 20.

Recent news reports have revealed that the Modi government is keen to expand these takedown powers. It intends to allow the ministries of Home Affairs, External Affairs, Defense, and Information and Broadcasting to issue content-blocking orders to social media platforms as well. At present, only the MeitY ministry is empowered to do so.

As The Hindu editorial observed, “The government’s plan to decentralize blocking powers to multiple Ministries could effectively create a regime of arbitrary censorship, where any department can silence a critic without the specialized oversight, however flawed, of the IT Ministry.”

Incidentally, the current 2-3 hour timeline is the shortest takedown window prescribed by any government in the world. A news report in the Indian Express stated that the Modi government is keen to reduce this takedown window to just 1 hour.

The Modi government is working toward restricting any sort of criticism, critique, or satire of the prime minister and his government. Authoritarian leaders are usually insecure and extremely sensitive to any sort of criticism.

Opposition parties, including the Congress, have reacted strongly to this digital censorship. Congress spokesperson Supriya Shrinate slammed Modi as a “Coward PM.” “How scared is Narendra Modi?” a post on social media asked, while another pointed out: “They are terribly afraid of citizens not fearing them.”

Some pointed out the blatant hypocrisy of the Modi regime. “I want this government to be criticized. Criticism makes democracy stronger @narendramodi once claimed,” founding-editor of The Wire, Siddharth Varadarajan wrote on X, adding that “…laughter and satire have become an Emergency matter for Modi.” Varadajaran’s post was in reference to the blocking of a viral “cartoon in The Wire by ‘56 Productions’ (which) has obviously unnerved the Dear Leader.” The 52-second animated video, which was taken down on February 9, was set to the tune of a popular Hindi film song and took a humorous swipe at Modi for evading questions in Parliament regarding former Chief of Army Staff General M.M. Naravane’s unpublished memoir that discussed Modi’s inept leadership during the 2020 military standoff with China.

Not only was the cartoon removed, but the reprisal by the government was swift. The Wire’s main Instagram account was blocked in India for nearly two hours. The government ascribed it to “an error.” Journalist and digital rights organizations like Digipub lashed out strongly against the “alarming erosion of freedom of expression in India.” In a strong statement, Digipub said, “these reflect a growing pattern in which satire, critical journalism and dissenting voices are constrained … undermining democratic norms…”

Significantly, the MeitY takedown orders are issued under a strict confidentiality clause. While there are inbuilt safeguards to prevent misuse of the government’s blocking power for digital content, the confidentiality clause empowers the government to block content without citing any explicit reason. The IFF argued that this renders the censorship “opaque” and makes it more difficult for these arbitrary takedowns to be challenged in court.

The shrinking of the constitutional right of free speech today, as guaranteed under Article 19, is evident from the recent targeted blocking of the accounts of  journalists who reposted images of an Election Commission letter on their accounts. Controversy erupted over a letter of the Election Commission of India (ECI) that carried the stamp of Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). It was circulated online with allegations that it was proof of a “compromised” ECI. The ECI officially ascribed it to a “clerical error.” The Kerala Police soon ordered the digital takedown of the accounts that carried the controversial letter, saying they insulted the ECI and claiming that their content “undermines communal harmony.”

For a regime that makes boastful claims of being a “Vishwaguru” (world leader) in the digital world and talks of Digital India, the Modi government’s dictatorial tendency of digital censorship, legal threats, secrecy, and vindictive streak belie its tall claims.

Get to the bottom of the story

Subscribe today and join thousands of diplomats, analysts, policy professionals and business readers who rely on The Diplomat for expert Asia-Pacific coverage.

Get unlimited access to in-depth analysis you won't find anywhere else, from South China Sea tensions to ASEAN diplomacy to India-Pakistan relations. More than 5,000 articles a year.

Unlimited articles and expert analysis

Weekly newsletter with exclusive insights

16-year archive of diplomatic coverage

Ad-free reading on all devices

Support independent journalism

Already have an account? Log in.

On March 18, a parody video reel that had garnered 16 million views on Instagram was suddenly blocked to viewers in India. The reel by stand-up comedian @hunnywhoisfunny, aka Pulkit Mani, satirized Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s overzealous behavior when meeting foreign dignitaries and foreigners. In the reel, Mani mimicked Modi’s habits while meeting foreign leaders during official state visits, including his embarrassing body hugging of these leaders, his guffaws and unintelligible speech. It went viral on social media.

The reel was then suddenly taken down by the platform with a formal notice that said: “Withheld in response to a legal demand” by the Government of India.

Also on March 18, dozens of other parody and satire accounts were blocked, citing “Request (of takedown) is based on local laws.” Some of those blocked on X (formerly Twitter) were handles like @Nehr_who, @DrNimoYadav, @DuckKiBaat, @mrjethwani — all extremely popular political satire and parody accounts — and @ActivistSandeep, the handle of journalist-cum-activist Sandeep Singh. Each of these handles post sharp, insightful political satire. From targeting Modi on his educational qualifications to India’s mishandling of the Israel-U.S. war on Iran, the consequent LPG shortage in the country to the mistreatment of India’s religious minorities – all of these subjects are fodder for political satire.

Angry at this digital censorship, netizens lambasted the Modi government for misusing the Information Technology Act (IT) Act 2000 to muzzle free speech and censor any criticism of Modi.

Since 2014, when Modi became India’s prime minister, his Hindu majoritarian regime has become increasingly authoritarian and intolerant of criticism and dissent.

On March 19, Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF), the non-profit organization advocating for digital rights and free speech in India, issued a statement on the “Alarming Escalation of Social Media Censorship and Proposed Expansion of Takedown Powers under the IT Act.”  The statement pointed out that “little or no explanation” had been provided for the take-down order. The IFF further said that it appears the take-down orders are targeting speech that is “political, satirical, or critical rather than clearly unlawful.” It urged the government to provide “timely notice, clear grounds for avenues for remedy” in the interest of transparency. The IFF offered to assist anyone who had faced such online censorship and help them challenge it legally.

In an editorial, The Hindu newspaper criticized the government crackdown. “A person’s entire account being blocked amounts to a digital exile, removing the person from the public square, which is a hallmark of an authoritarian government rather than of a liberal democracy,” it said.

Platforms like X, Instagram, and Facebook are required to comply with the government’s “legal demands” in keeping with section 69(A) of the IT Act 2000, which enables the government to block online content to protect the sovereignty, integrity, national security or public order. The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), which orders these takedowns, has not forwarded any such reasons behind the recent spate of crackdowns. Failure to comply with these emergency blocking orders can result in seven years’ imprisonment and a fine. It’s not surprising that the social media platforms enforce the takedown without assessing the legality of the demand.

In a high-handed move in February this year, the Modi government further tightened its leash on free speech. From the existing 24 to 36 hours takedown window, it is now mandated that platforms have to take down content within three hours. These changed rules came into effect on February 20.

Recent news reports have revealed that the Modi government is keen to expand these takedown powers. It intends to allow the ministries of Home Affairs, External Affairs, Defense, and Information and Broadcasting to issue content-blocking orders to social media platforms as well. At present, only the MeitY ministry is empowered to do so.

As The Hindu editorial observed, “The government’s plan to decentralize blocking powers to multiple Ministries could effectively create a regime of arbitrary censorship, where any department can silence a critic without the specialized oversight, however flawed, of the IT Ministry.”

Incidentally, the current 2-3 hour timeline is the shortest takedown window prescribed by any government in the world. A news report in the Indian Express stated that the Modi government is keen to reduce this takedown window to just 1 hour.

The Modi government is working toward restricting any sort of criticism, critique, or satire of the prime minister and his government. Authoritarian leaders are usually insecure and extremely sensitive to any sort of criticism.

Opposition parties, including the Congress, have reacted strongly to this digital censorship. Congress spokesperson Supriya Shrinate slammed Modi as a “Coward PM.” “How scared is Narendra Modi?” a post on social media asked, while another pointed out: “They are terribly afraid of citizens not fearing them.”

Some pointed out the blatant hypocrisy of the Modi regime. “I want this government to be criticized. Criticism makes democracy stronger @narendramodi once claimed,” founding-editor of The Wire, Siddharth Varadarajan wrote on X, adding that “…laughter and satire have become an Emergency matter for Modi.” Varadajaran’s post was in reference to the blocking of a viral “cartoon in The Wire by ‘56 Productions’ (which) has obviously unnerved the Dear Leader.” The 52-second animated video, which was taken down on February 9, was set to the tune of a popular Hindi film song and took a humorous swipe at Modi for evading questions in Parliament regarding former Chief of Army Staff General M.M. Naravane’s unpublished memoir that discussed Modi’s inept leadership during the 2020 military standoff with China.

Not only was the cartoon removed, but the reprisal by the government was swift. The Wire’s main Instagram account was blocked in India for nearly two hours. The government ascribed it to “an error.” Journalist and digital rights organizations like Digipub lashed out strongly against the “alarming erosion of freedom of expression in India.” In a strong statement, Digipub said, “these reflect a growing pattern in which satire, critical journalism and dissenting voices are constrained … undermining democratic norms…”

Significantly, the MeitY takedown orders are issued under a strict confidentiality clause. While there are inbuilt safeguards to prevent misuse of the government’s blocking power for digital content, the confidentiality clause empowers the government to block content without citing any explicit reason. The IFF argued that this renders the censorship “opaque” and makes it more difficult for these arbitrary takedowns to be challenged in court.

The shrinking of the constitutional right of free speech today, as guaranteed under Article 19, is evident from the recent targeted blocking of the accounts of  journalists who reposted images of an Election Commission letter on their accounts. Controversy erupted over a letter of the Election Commission of India (ECI) that carried the stamp of Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). It was circulated online with allegations that it was proof of a “compromised” ECI. The ECI officially ascribed it to a “clerical error.” The Kerala Police soon ordered the digital takedown of the accounts that carried the controversial letter, saying they insulted the ECI and claiming that their content “undermines communal harmony.”

For a regime that makes boastful claims of being a “Vishwaguru” (world leader) in the digital world and talks of Digital India, the Modi government’s dictatorial tendency of digital censorship, legal threats, secrecy, and vindictive streak belie its tall claims.

Kavita Chowdhury is an independent journalist and writes on development, politics, gender, culture.

India political satire

Social media censorship

© The Diplomat