Mains Practice Questions for the Day
- Q. Social media addiction has emerged as a major public health and governance challenge in the digital age. Discuss its causes, implications, and the need for regulatory interventions. (15 M)
- Q. The Election Commission’s use of Article 324 powers for transferring officials during elections has sparked debates on federalism and administrative autonomy. Critically examine the issue. (15 M)
Q. Social media addiction has emerged as a major public health and governance challenge in the digital age. Discuss its causes, implications, and the need for regulatory interventions. (15 M)
(GS Paper II – Governance, Social Justice – Issues related to Health, Children, Digital Regulation)
Introduction:
Social media addiction is a form of behavioral addiction where individuals exhibit compulsive usage patterns driven by dopamine-reward mechanisms similar to gambling or substance abuse. Recent US court rulings (2026) holding platforms like Meta and YouTube liable for “addictive design” highlight a paradigm shift from user responsibility to platform accountability, bringing the issue into the domain of governance and public health.
Body
1. Causes of Social Media Addiction (Design + Behavioural Factors)
- Social media platforms are engineered using algorithm-driven engagement models that maximize user time for advertising revenue.
- Features such as infinite scroll, push notifications, and intermittent rewards (likes, shares) create compulsive usage loops.
- The use of beauty filters and curated content leads to unrealistic self-comparisons, especially among adolescents. Additionally, early exposure—children as young as 6 years accessing platforms—intensifies vulnerability due to immature cognitive development. Internal disclosures from Big Tech reveal prior awareness of these psychological risks, indicating a deliberate design bias toward engagement over well-being.
2. Implications (Social, Psychological, Legal)
- Excessive usage has been linked to rising cases of anxiety, depression, body dysmorphia, and reduced attention spans, particularly among youth. It affects social behaviour, academic performance, and interpersonal relationships.
- The “catch them young” model raises concerns about long-term cognitive and emotional development. Legally, recent judgments awarding millions in damages signal a shift toward corporate liability, similar to tobacco litigation.
- It also creates regulatory challenges as governments must balance free speech with platform accountability.
3. Need for Regulatory Interventions
- There is a growing need to move from self-regulation to state-backed oversight.
- Regulatory frameworks should mandate age verification systems, restrict addictive design elements (especially for minors), and ensure algorithmic transparency through independent audits. Strengthening digital literacy programs can empower users to manage screen time and recognize manipulative design patterns.
- A balanced regulatory approach is required to protect mental health without undermining innovation and freedom of expression.
Conclusion:
Social media addiction represents a complex intersection of technology, psychology, and governance. The recent global legal developments underline the urgent need for responsible platform design and effective regulation. A coordinated approach involving policy, technology, and awareness is essential to safeguard public health, especially of vulnerable groups like children.
Q. The Election Commission’s use of Article 324 powers for transferring officials during elections has sparked debates on federalism and administrative autonomy. Critically examine the issue. (15 M)
(GS Paper II – Polity, Governance – Constitutional Bodies, Federalism, Election Commission)
Introduction:
The Election Commission of India (ECI), under Article 324, is entrusted with the superintendence, direction, and control of elections. The recent controversy over the transfer of senior officials (Chief Secretary, DGP) in election-bound states has raised concerns about the extent of its plenary powers vis-à-vis federal principles and administrative autonomy.
Body
1. Constitutional Basis and Justification of ECI’s Powers
- Article 324 provides the ECI with residuary (plenary) powers to ensure free and fair elections, especially where laws are silent. The Supreme Court in Mohinder Singh Gill (1978) termed it a “reservoir of power”.
- Further, under Section 13CC of RPA, 1950, officers on election duty are deemed to be on deputation to the ECI, allowing it to exercise disciplinary control.
- Transfers are often justified to ensure neutrality, level playing field, and public confidence, especially when officers are perceived to be biased or have long tenures (3+ years).
2. Concerns and Constitutional Tensions
- The absence of explicit statutory backing in the Representation of the People Acts (1950/1951) for transferring top-level officials raises legal concerns.
- The All India Services Act vests transfer and administrative control of IAS/IPS officers with state governments, making unilateral ECI action contentious.
- Such moves may lead to administrative paralysis, particularly when key posts like Chief Secretary or DGP are abruptly vacated.
- There are also concerns regarding opacity and arbitrariness, as criteria for such transfers are often not publicly disclosed. Moreover, it raises issues of cooperative federalism, as State Public Services fall under the State List (Seventh Schedule).
3. Balancing Electoral Integrity and Federalism (Way Forward)
- There is a need for clear Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) defining objective criteria for transfers to avoid arbitrariness.
- A consultative mechanism with state governments, without diluting ECI’s authority, can reduce friction.
- Strengthening the deputation model rather than outright removal can ensure continuity in governance.
- A judicial clarification by the Supreme Court on the scope of Article 324 vis-à-vis statutory laws is necessary. Enhancing transparency and providing reasoned orders can strengthen institutional legitimacy.
Conclusion:
The ECI’s plenary powers are vital for safeguarding electoral integrity, but they must operate within the framework of rule of law and federal balance. Ensuring free and fair elections should not come at the cost of administrative stability and constitutional principles. A balanced, transparent, and consultative approach is essential to maintain both democratic credibility and institutional harmony.
