It has barely been over two months since Pakistan lifted its ban on X/Twitter amidst the clashes with India and the state appears to have issued a sharp reminder that it is not yet done with banning and blocking. This time, it is YouTube channels in the crosshairs, with a local court in Islamabad directing authorities to block 27 well-known YouTube channels accused of circulating ‘anti-state’ content. The order was issued on the request of the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA), which initiated an inquiry into the matter last month and found multiple YouTube channels allegedly involved in uploading and spreading material in violation of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (Peca) and other relevant laws. Those banned include several PTI-affiliated channels, some prominent journalists and former anchors. A state official claimed that these channels were a source of publicly disseminating false, misleading and fake information against state institutions and officials. While this might seem to be rather straightforward, the line between what counts as ‘anti-state’ and what is legitimate criticism can be quite blurry, particularly in an information eco-system that is not known for its transparency and where the facts themselves are often disputed. It must also be noted that the laws governing digital content, particularly the Prevention of Electronic Crimes (Peca) (Amendment) Bill 2025, are quite contentious and have been roundly criticised by journalists, media bodies and human rights bodies.
However, this does not mean that one can simply dismiss the concerns of the state. The short conflict with India back in April-May was an interesting time to lift restrictions on X/Twitter, considering that the platform was arguably more rife with misinformation than ever before. Indian accounts were clearly using the fog of war as an opportunity to spread targeted misinformation and fake news about Pakistan and its security forces while concealing the losses sustained by India. This is the kind of content that can be restricted, subject of course to reasonable conditions. The problem is also compounded by the fact that social media companies do not exactly have high standards when it comes to any news-related content on their platforms, at least not ones that are enforced rigorously. In such circumstances, it is left to state regulators to try and do something about fake news. But when does countering misinformation veer into being oppressive and censorship? There do not seem to be any easy answers to this question.
It should also be noted that the state has been trying to crackdown on misinformation for some time now, but it remains unclear whether it has actually made any progress. The fact that crackdowns of this sort have to be launched every now and again indicates that the problem keeps resurfacing. The nature of social media allows banned accounts or channels to be restarted under different names or for content creators and their audiences to switch to new platforms. One can look at how India’s attempt to crackdown on the X/Twitter accounts of Pakistani celebrities and politicians has devolved into a ban-restore-ban fiasco to gauge just how difficult it is to restrict access to online content. It is quite literally one country against the world wide web. There is also the danger of legitimising genuine bad-faith actors by allowing them to claim they are being persecuted. This means ensuring that the relevant laws are fair and in accordance with human rights principles and that those accused have the right to due process and to argue their innocence. One does not want to end up doing more damage than the problem one is trying to prevent. Unfortunately, that is precisely what the state of Pakistan has been doing with its love for bans and blocks.