Nepal moves to block Facebook, X, YouTube and others

Scope of the Ban and Enforcement

• Nepal required large social platforms to register, provide a local contact/grievance handler, and comply with a new social media directive or be blocked.
• Some services complied earlier (e.g. TikTok, Viber); ~26 major apps were blocked, including Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, WhatsApp, X, Reddit, Discord, Signal, LinkedIn, Mastodon, and several local/regional apps.
• Implementation is mostly via ISP DNS blocking; in some past cases (Telegram) IP‑level blocking was used. DNS changes or VPNs can often bypass the ban, suggesting it’s aimed more at companies than at determined users.

Sovereignty, Compliance, and Authoritarian Risk

• One camp sees the move as a normal exercise of sovereignty: if platforms operate at scale in a country, they should obey local law and have an in‑country representative, as with EU‑style rules. Blocking is framed as the only effective sanction on trillion‑dollar firms.
• Others see “local representative” requirements as de‑facto hostage‑taking, especially in states with weak rule of law, torture reports, or politicized courts.
• Several commenters place Nepal in a regional pattern (e.g. Bangladesh) of using social media shutdowns to manage unrest and note domestic trends: corruption, power consolidation, attempts to control critical media, and prior success of an outsider candidate via Facebook.

Harms and Benefits of Social Media

• Strong anti‑social‑media sentiment: platforms described as “poison,” compared to tobacco or hard drugs; algorithms accused of maximizing outrage, destroying attention spans, fueling extremism, and serving foreign propaganda.
• Some argue banning or heavily regulating algorithmic feeds (non‑chronological, emotionally optimized, infinite scroll) while allowing basic messaging/forum‑style tools. Others want to go further and ban mass many‑to‑many platforms entirely.
• Counterpoints stress benefits: YouTube as a major learning resource; social media as a check on traditional media (e.g. conflict coverage), a tool for grassroots politics, and vital for privacy (Signal) and open discussion (Reddit, federated platforms).

Regulation vs Blanket Bans

• Proposed alternatives include:
  • Chronological, follow‑only feeds with minimal algorithmic injection.
  • Transparency about recommendation systems.
  • Usage caps or “credits” instead of outright bans.
  • Targeting business models (ads/engagement) rather than platforms.
• Critics of bans emphasize individual responsibility and “freedom of choice,” warning of nanny‑state logic; supporters frame restrictions as public‑health measures, analogous to limits on tobacco, alcohol, or car pollution.

Domestic Reaction and Likely Effects in Nepal

• Reports from Nepal describe both celebration (especially among those who see platforms as exploitative or culturally corrosive) and deep concern that this is “the next step” in a broader power grab.
• Given widespread unemployment, heavy remittance‑driven doomscrolling, and near‑universal distrust of politicians, some predict significant backlash once people feel the loss of entertainment, communication, and information access.