These aren’t blocks issued by a court order where a judge has validated whether the law was broken or not - these are journalists being suspended at behest of the government. Twitter has fought such blocks in the court before. People expected the same from a “free speech” Twitter.

Recent IT amendment rules, mentioned in the article, make safe harbor much harder, and the older Twitter would have been one of the few voices resisting it. I’d be very interested to see a comparison of Twitter’s Transparency reports pre and post Elon.

IFF has a nice primer on the new rules: https://internetfreedom.in/public-brief-on-the-it-amendment-..., and recent updates, which include a Fact Checking Unit: https://internetfreedom.in/public-brief-it-amendment-rules-2...

Twitter recently blocked something globally at the behest of the government of India. But if its just local blocking, then that seems reasonable if Twitter wants to operate in that country and the request is backed by law.

Twitter would probably consider India, with the world's largest population, to be a market worth continuing to operate in, even if only in accordance with the will of the government, since a social networking service whose main source of revenue is advertising is a business that needs to be used by a large number of people.

> India isn't a pleasant market to do business in

Source? Most people I've spoken to are extremely keen to do business with India, as it's a growing economy with tons of potential.