NazariyaEvery side of the story. You decide.
Winding downPolitics & Elections· Updated 28 OctLimited coverageBefore the courtsRunning story

CJP's Dipke accuses Centre of Instagram crackdown on critics

CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke alleged on Wednesday that the Centre is taking down thousands of anti-government Instagram posts daily. Other critics, including Ashutosh Ranka and Varun Grover, made similar claims, and none of the articles carries a government response.

Why it matters: The claims raise questions about online free speech and how the state uses blocking powers during a live political protest.

Part of a running story

Running story

The voter-roll revision and the protests

Latest first

Why it matters: How India's voter rolls are revised decides who can vote in 2027; the dispute has moved from the Election Commission to the courts, the streets and diplomacy.

  1. 2 NovKarnataka final voter roll has 99.32 lakh fewer names UpdatedLive
  2. 2 NovSC asks Election Commission to extend Delhi voter-roll deadlines UpdatedLive
  3. 2 NovINDIA bloc rally in Delhi demands Chief Election Commissioner's removal UpdatedLive
  4. ⋯
  5. 28 OctCJP's Dipke accuses Centre of Instagram crackdown on critics You are reading thisWinding down
+40 earlier · Open the issue page →

Based on 3 articles read in full. Scores describe each article's framing, not the outlet and not whether it is accurate.

Large outlets read: 2 of 15 (Times Now, Jagran). Most of India’s largest outlets, including NDTV, India Today, Times of India, Hindustan Times, The Hindu and Indian Express, block our reader in this prototype, so their coverage is missing here. The launch pipeline reads their public feeds.

What's missing: None of the articles gives a government response or independent data to check the takedown claims.

What everyone agrees on

  • Abhijeet Dipke said on Wednesday that the Centre is removing thousands of anti-government Instagram posts and accounts. 1 2 3
  • Dipke warned that such censorship could deepen public distrust of the government. 1 2 3
  • CJP leader Ashutosh Ranka alleged a wide crackdown, with thousands of accounts restricted and lakhs of videos removed. 1 2 3
  • None of the articles includes a response from the government. 1 2

How the coverage differs

All three outlets lean critical and relay the critics' claims without a government reply; Times Now adds the Delhi High Court case.

  • Free speech: Grover's satirical poem on '2047 Viksit Bharat' and a Live Law reel on the Election Commission affidavit are cited as removed, with the IT Act and a legal request named as grounds. 1 3
  • Link to the protest: the claims come amid allegations that posts critical of the handling of the electoral roll revision agitation are being taken down. 2
  • Court and student voices: Times Now adds AISA president Neha Bora's remarks and a Delhi High Court notice on the blocking of the @bring_back__ballot handle. 3

Where they disagree

No real disagreement between sides in this coverage.

What's missing

  • No government reply: No article carries a response from the Centre or Instagram's parent company on the allegations. 1 2 3
  • No independent count: The figures of thousands of posts and lakhs of videos are claims by critics, with no verified data given. 1 2 3
  • Legal basis of takedowns: Only partial detail is given on which orders or provisions were used for each removal. 1 3

The articles

Left-leaning
1 · Dainik Jagran · HindiConfidence: Medium
'केंद्र सरकार हटा रही विरोधियों की इंस्टग्राम पोस्ट,' अभिजीत दीपके सहित कई लोगों ने की शिकायत
This article:

Why: Relays critics' censorship claims against the Centre, stressing free speech and civil liberties. Only one side is quoted and there is no government reply, so it leans left on civil liberties.

2 · The WeekConfidence: Medium
CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke accuses Centre of social media crackdown
This article:

Why: Relays only CJP leaders' claims of censorship of critics; civil-liberties framing and scepticism of state power lean left, with no government response included.

3 · Times NowConfidence: Medium
'Taking Down Accounts Won’t Make....’: CJP's Abhijeet Dipke Alleges Instagram Crackdown By Centre Oct 28, 2026, 13:51 IST
This article:

Why: Centres civil-liberty and free-speech complaints against state takedowns; sourcing is almost entirely opposition-aligned voices with no government reply, though court context adds some balance.

How we score

Ideology score, −10 to +10

Left-leaning (−10 to −3)
Secular-pluralist framing, minority protection, caste justice and voter access, civil liberties, an active state.
Centre (−2 to +2)
Several positions represented fairly, neutral language, reporting kept apart from opinion.
Right-leaning (+3 to +10)
Cultural nationalism, national strength and security, scepticism of group-based policy, voter-roll integrity, market-led growth.

Stance toward the government

Critical, Neutral or Supportive, scored separately. It refers to the Union government unless the story is about a state. On the spectrum strip, each dot is an article: its position is the ideology score and its colour is the stance.

The swap test

If an article would score differently with the parties' roles reversed, that signal is partisanship. It goes into the stance tag, not the ideology score.

Confidence

High, Medium or Low, based on how much of the article was read, how many clear signals it has, and whether they agree.

Limited coverage and blindspots

Stories with fewer than five articles are marked. A blindspot is a contested story where we found coverage from only one side.

Not ideological

Articles that touch none of the three dimensions, such as a car launch or a match report, carry no ideology score.

How often the feed refreshes

This prototype is refreshed by hand (last on 17 Oct, 03:00 IST). At launch:

Wires and the top 20 outletschecked every 5 minutes
All other outletschecked every 15 minutes
New storygoes up at 3 articles from 2 or more outlets, marked Limited coverage
Live storiesnew articles added every 15 minutes; summary rewritten at most hourly
Home page orderevery 15 minutes

Updates are added, never rewritten

New facts go into a dated update log at the top of the story. New articles carry an “Added” tag. If a note or list changes, the earlier version stays viewable.

Live, winding down, archived

A story is Live while coverage arrives, Winding down after about 2 days without new coverage, and Archived after about 7. Nothing is deleted: links never change, archived scores are frozen, and stories stay on their issue pages and in search.

Large outlets missing

NDTV, India Today, Times of India, Hindustan Times, The Hindu, Indian Express, News18, ABP, Times Now and Mint block the reader used for this prototype, so their articles are missing. Each story shows how many of India’s 15 largest outlets we read. The launch pipeline will read outlets’ public feeds, TV transcripts and Hindi articles.

Who is accountable

Editor and grievance officer

Editor-in-charge: S. Kalra, editor@thenazariya.com. The editor-in-charge sets Nazariya's editorial rules, reviews the AI desks' daily decisions, and is responsible for everything we publish.

How we work: AI reads and scores every article against our published rubric; an AI standards desk checks accuracy and fairness; people set the rules, review decisions and handle complaints.

Grievance officer under the IT Rules, 2021: to be confirmed (based in India). Until then, write to grievance@thenazariya.com. Complaints are acknowledged within 24 hours and resolved within 15 days. To report a factual error: corrections@thenazariya.com. Other questions: support@thenazariya.com.

Funding and ownership

Ownership: Nazariya is independently owned by S. Kalra, an Indian citizen.

Funding: Nazariya is currently funded entirely by its founder. It carries no advertising and takes no money from any political party, government or party-linked organisation. In future it will be supported by optional reader memberships. Any other funder, grant or investor will be listed here, with the amount and date.

Independence: No owner, funder or member can change a story, a score or a correction. Scores follow the published rubric, and anyone can appeal them.

Appeals

Anyone, including the outlet that published an article, can appeal a score: tap any score on a story page, then "Appeal this score" to write to the editor. Outlets can also dispute a summary. The editor reviews every appeal, and any change is recorded below. Appeals: appeals@thenazariya.com.

Rules we follow

No detail that could identify a child or a survivor of sexual violence (Juvenile Justice Act, POCSO, BNS section 72). Court cases are reported as what was said and alleged. No analysis of a poll in the 48 hours before voting there (Representation of the People Act, section 126). Press Council and NBDSA norms on communal incidents.

Corrections log

  • 16 Oct · Goregaon toddler death: removed the building's name and an unverified claim about the 10-year-old's health, to protect the child's identity.
  • 16 Oct · India–US trade deal: merged two duplicate story pages into one.
  • 16 Oct · INS Mangrol: one report names the commissioning officer differently from three others; flagged in the story, not resolved.