Abstract

Social media has transformed how people communicate, share opinions, and engage in public debates. With billions of users worldwide, platforms like Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), Instagram, and YouTube have become powerful spaces for free expression. However, the growing influence of these platforms also raises important legal and constitutional questions. What happens when a user’s post is removed? When does online speech cross the line into hate speech or misinformation? And how do different countries regulate these issues while still protecting the right to freedom of speech? This paper explores the constitutional protection of freedom of speech in the age of social media through a comparative analysis of India, the United States, and the European Union. It begins by explaining the historical and conceptual background of the right to free speech. Then, it outlines the legal frameworks in each region, focusing on key constitutional provisions, court rulings, and digital laws. The role of social media platforms as private regulators of speech is also examined, especially their content moderation policies and the challenges they face in balancing free speech with user safety. The paper highlights both similarities and differences in how each jurisdiction approaches online speech. While the U.S. gives strong protection under the First Amendment, India allows reasonable restrictions, and the EU emphasizes balancing rights through regulation. The paper concludes with policy recommendations for creating clearer rules and encouraging greater transparency in platform governance. By examining these global trends, this research aims to suggest a balanced way forward that protects freedom of expression while addressing online harms fairly and lawfully.

Keywords