Reuters X account restored in India after suspension over legal demand
The Reuters News account on X was restored in India on Sunday, a day after the social media platform suspended it, citing a legal demand. "At this time, we are no longer withholding access in INDIA to your account," X said in an email to the Reuters social media team, without elaborating. Representatives for X, Reuters and the Indian government did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the restoration of the account.
Earlier on Sunday, a spokesperson for the Indian government's
Press Information Bureau
told Reuters that no Indian government agency had required withholding the Reuters handle, adding that officials were working with X to resolve the problem. A Reuters spokesperson had said the agency was working with X to resolve this matter and get the Reuters account reinstated in India as soon as possible. Reuters World, another X account operated by the news agency which was blocked in India, was also restored late Sunday night. The main Reuters account, which has more than 25 million followers globally, had been blocked in India since Saturday night. A notice told X users that "@Reuters has been withheld in IN (India) in response to a legal demand".
In an email to the Reuters social media team on May 16, X said: "It is our policy to notify account holders if we receive a legal request from an authorized entity (such as law enforcement or a government agency) to remove content from their account."
"In order to comply with X obligations under India's local laws, we have withheld your X account in India under the country's Information Technology Act, 2000; the content remains available elsewhere". Reuters could not ascertain if the May 16 email was linked to Saturday's account suspension nor could it determine what specific content the demand referred to, why its removal was sought or the entity that had lodged the complaint. While the email did not specify which entity had made the request or what content they sought to remove, it said X had been advised that in such cases, a user could contact the secretary of India's Information and Broadcasting Ministry.
The secretary, Sanjay Jaju, did not respond to requests seeking comment. The 2000 law allows designated government officials to demand the takedown of content from social media platforms they deem to violate local laws, including on the grounds of national security or if a post threatens public order. X has long been at odds with India's government over content-removal requests. In March, the company sued the federal government over a new government website the company says expands takedown powers to "countless" government officials.
The case is continuing. India has said X wrongly labelled an official website a "censorship portal", as the website only allows tech companies to be notified about harmful online content.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
27 minutes ago
- India Today
Abu Salem to stay in jail till 2030, Bombay High Court rules out early release
The Bombay High Court on Monday observed that gangster Abu Salem's sentence in prison will get over only in 2030 and not on March 31, 2025 as he was bench of Justices AS Gadkari and Rajesh S Patil admitted his plea, which will be heard later and noted that the Supreme Court in its order had said that he could be sentenced only to 25 years, which would get over in the year 2030. The bench said, "We reckon that your date of arrest is October 2005. According to it, 25 years are yet to be completed."advertisementSalem, extradited from Portugal in 2005, was sentenced to life imprisonment for his role in the 1993 serial blasts by a special court under TADA and for the murder of builder Pradeep Jain. Salem had filed an appeal against that order and pointed out that when he was extradited, the Indian government had assured Portugal that he would not be sentenced for more than 25 years. It was in this context that the Supreme Court observed that he could be sentenced to 2030 lawyers, Rishi Malhotra and Farhana Shah, contended that Salem had earned three years and 16 days of remission for good conduct, along with a one-month credit granted by the Supreme Court for time spent in custody in Portugal. They claimed that these factors pushed his total sentence duration beyond 25 years, making him eligible for the Central Bureau of Investigation strongly opposed this argument. Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh, appearing for the CBI, submitted that Salem was mixing up the calculations to meet the 25-year threshold. Singh also said that Salem should approach the Supreme Court for clarification if he believes its earlier order was not being followed Malhotra insisted that the 2030 timeline failed to account for the remission period, the bench responded sharply, saying, 'Are you saying that the Supreme Court order is wrong? Even applying simple logic, 25 years is yet to be completed.'The court admitted Salem's plea and agreed to an expedited hearing, but no date has been set.- EndsMust Watch
Economic Times
28 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Job seeker reveals the one question that has got them ghosted by the HR
Synopsis An Indian professional, returning home after years abroad, faces difficulty finding a job despite a strong background. Companies prioritize previous salary over skills, often making lowball offers based on outdated information. This practice, common in India, disregards international experience and benchmarks, leading to frustration for returning professionals. iStock Job seeker says refusing to answer about past CTC has led to recruiters ghosting them A professional who recently came back to India after spending several years working overseas is facing an unexpected and frustrating challenge: landing a new job. Despite holding a solid track record and four years of experience at a reputed financial organization abroad, the returnee is finding it difficult to secure meaningful employment their story on the subreddit Indian Workplace, the individual revealed that after applying to over a hundred job openings, only a handful—no more than five—actually responded. Even those limited interactions quickly turned uncomfortable. The very first question posed during these calls from recruiters was almost always about the candidate's previous salary, also known as CTC (Cost to Company). The jobseeker found this not only invasive but also inappropriate, particularly given the stark differences in currency value and salary standards between frustration deepened when the candidate chose transparency and disclosed their past earnings. Almost immediately after revealing the foreign pay figure, hiring managers would abruptly end communication, effectively ghosting the applicant. This pattern repeated itself enough times to become a source of serious concern and confusion. Seeking advice from others in similar situations, the professional asked how one should even respond to such inquiries when clearly the intent isn't to match qualifications but to lowball based on outdated or irrelevant salary users in the forum chimed in to validate the experience, with one pointing out that this approach is unfortunately widespread in the Indian corporate scene. While it may be considered unethical in places like North America or Europe—where employment laws often protect applicants from having to disclose salary history—in India, the lack of legal boundaries allows companies to continue this exploitative trend remarked on how absurd the offers could get, with some companies shamelessly proposing salaries as low as ₹1 lakh per annum, even for candidates with senior-level experience. One sarcastic comment mocked the system, citing a scenario where a former CTO was offered just Rs 4 lakh per year. Another contributor gave a hypothetical but all-too-common example: someone earning Rs 25 lakh annually abroad being told that due to a six-month employment gap, the company could now only offer Rs 3 final consensus among users was sobering: regardless of whether a candidate earned in euros or dollars, Indian employers often disregard international benchmarks. Instead of evaluating skills and experience on merit, they prefer anchoring offers to previous CTC figures—no matter how irrelevant or mismatched. When gearing up for a job interview, it's essential to have a clear strategy for answering questions related to your expected Cost to Company (CTC). According to a report by it's wise to go into the conversation prepared—not just by knowing your value, but also by learning about the organization's mission, offerings, future goals, and employee feedback. Often, when two candidates are equally qualified, a company may lean toward the one whose salary expectations align better with their represents the complete financial commitment an employer makes for an employee annually. This includes not only direct cash payments but also additional non-monetary benefits. CTC typically consists of three primary elements: the base salary, various allowances, and mandatory deductions. Generally, your base salary constitutes less than half—usually around 40%—of your total CTC. The remaining parts, which include perks and deductions, can differ based on the company's structure, internal policies, and organizational scale. Gaining a clear understanding of these segments helps you better navigate the salary discussion when the time standards usually follow a pattern, although they can vary slightly depending on the company's location, size, and industry. Utilize job portals and employment websites to review ongoing salary trends. When evaluating pay expectations, take into account factors such as your experience level, professional skills, work environment, potential job risks, travel obligations, and benefits provided by similar employers. Many recruitment agencies also publish salary benchmarks and industry-wise compensation reports—reviewing these can give you a realistic idea of what to expect and ask you've been shortlisted for an interview, it typically indicates that the company is open to offering a package equal to or better than your current one. If the recruiter asks you to state your expected CTC, it's better to provide a range instead of a rigid figure. This should be informed by your research and existing pay. Consider all salary components—like benefits and bonuses—included in your take-home income before proposing a range. For instance, if your findings reveal that the average compensation for your role is ₹6,00,000 per annum, you can comfortably ask for a slightly higher figure. Alternatively, increasing your current CTC by 15–20% to set your expected range is also reasonable. Quoting a range suggests flexibility and demonstrates your interest in continuing the hiring not uncommon for interviewers to bring up the CTC discussion early in the process—sometimes before any job details are discussed. If this happens, it's acceptable to delay your response diplomatically. You might say that you'd prefer to understand the job role, duties, and expectations more clearly before discussing compensation. You could also turn the conversation around by asking if they can share the salary bracket they've allocated for the most hiring scenarios, especially for entry-level and mid-tier roles, candidates go through multiple interview rounds—typically three. Senior and executive roles often involve even more rigorous and formal evaluation stages. The ideal time to disclose your expected CTC is usually during the second or third round, once there's a better mutual understanding of your qualifications, strengths, and the value you could bring to the familiar with each component of your compensation package empowers you during negotiations. You may ask for a better base salary or suggest alternatives if the company can't meet your proposed CTC. For instance, if their budget is tight, they might offer stock options or performance-based incentives instead of higher pay. It's also reasonable to negotiate for cash in lieu of non-cash benefits, especially if that suits your financial goals more effectively. ( Originally published on Jul 05, 2025 )
New Indian Express
36 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
World Boxing urges BFI to conduct elections by August 31
CHENNAI: The World Boxing has given more time to the Interim Committee of the Boxing Federation of India (BFI) to conduct elections. The committee was formed in April after the BFI elections were stalled due to court battles. The letter from WB president Boris van der Vorst suggested that the elections should be conducted by August 31. Though the WB has noticed some changes in the system and commended their effort 'in overseeing and restructuring the governance', it has also noted that elections have not been held as yet. The WB president said that they (WB) were satisfied by the functioning of the interim committee and their 'athletes first' approach. 'We are pleased to observe that the Interim Committee has been functioning effectively and has made significant strides in restoring transparency and stability within the national boxing administration,' said the letter to the BFI. 'World Boxing continues to monitor developments in Indian boxing closely and is encouraged by the continued participation of Indian athletes in international competitions, as well as their consistent success on the podium. These achievements are a reflection of the structured and positive efforts being undertaken under your leadership.' However, the WB said: 'In parallel, and with a view to ensuring long-term institutional stability, World Boxing urges the Interim Committee to initiate and complete the electoral process for the BFI by 31st August 2025. This will enable a smooth transition to a democratically elected executive body.'
