In Focus by The Hindu

For the first time since 2018, the United States and Iran are holding high level negotiations. What Iran wants is clear: an end to US sanctions, and resumption of economic engagement. But the US has been speaking in different voices, ranging from a maximalist position of complete dismantlement of the Iranian nuclear program, to a more moderate goal of cappingthe weaponistion of it. President Donald Trump has also given a two-month deadline to Iran to make a deal. If it doesn’t, he has threatened military strikes.So, what can we realistically expect from these talks? How real are American threats to bomb Iran if it doesn’t agree to a deal in two months? And is Iran negotiating from a weakerposition than it was in, say, 2015 when the previous deal was signed?Guest: Stanly Johny, International Affairs Editor, The Hindu Host: G. Sampath, Social Affairs Editor, The HinduEdited by Sharmada Venkatsubramanian

Even as India grapples with its estimated 101 million cases of Type 2 diabetes, a new type of diabetes has recently hit the headlines – Type 5. At the International Diabetes Federation’s meeting held recently, an announcement was made: a working group is to be formed to develop criteria and guidelines for Type 5 diabetes. Estimates indicate that this form of diabetes affects 25 million people across the world, primarily in Asia and Africa. Though this form of diabetes was first recorded over 75 years ago, there has been very little attention paid to it so far.What is type 5 diabetes? Whom does it affect? What is its burden in India? And Do more resources need to be allocated to fighting it?Guest: Prof Nihal Thomas, senior professor, department of endocrinology, diabetes and metabolism, Christian Medical College, Vellore and chair of the IDF Working GroupHost: Zubeda HamidEdited by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian

The Income Tax Bill, 2025 was introduced in the Lok Sabha recently. It seeks to modernise and simplify the Income Tax Act, 1961. While the Bill is indeed shorter in length than the original Act it seeks to replace, there is one major concern: privacy experts believe it institutes a regime of tax surveillance, in complete violation of the Supreme Court judgement in the landmark Justice Puttasamy case where it ruled that privacy is a fundamental right. Tax experts hold that under the provisions of this Bill, the state can claim complete access to the entirety of a person’s “virtual digital space” merely on suspicion that she may be hiding income and evading tax. Critics have also said that the Bill does not rationalise monetary thresholds for various compliances and deductions, nor does it provide meaningful revisions in the penalty and prosecution changes. Guest: Deepak Joshi, Advocate-on-Record in the Supreme Court and a qualified Chartered Accountant. Host: G. Sampath, Social Affairs Editor, The Hindu.Edited by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian.

Every day, millions of posts are made online — tweets, videos, memes, reels. Some content is violent, misleading, or even dangerous. This is where content moderation comes in. However, deciding what stays up and what comes down isn't as simple as it sounds.  In fact, X has sued the Union government in the Karnataka High Court for the SAHYOG portal, which it says is a “censorship portal” that allows local police and different parts of the government to demand takedowns. The Karnataka High Court did not grant interim relief to X after the Centre informed the court that there was no reason for the social media platform to be apprehensive of any coercive action against it. The matter will be taken up on April 24. Taking down content is actually quite normal in India. In 2024, the govt blocked a 28,000 URLs across various social media platforms. These URLs had content linked to pro-Khalistan separatist movements, hate speech, and material that are considered to be la threat to national security and public order. A recent report in The Hindu says that nearly a third of the 66 takedown notices sent to X by the Ministry of Home Affairs’ Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) over the past year warn the platform to remove content about Union Ministers and Central government agencies. This included content about PM Narendra Modi, Home Minister Amit Shah and his son Jay Shah, and Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman.  Globally, too, platforms have come under criticism for content moderation, or the lack of it. Facebook’s role in amplifying hate speech during the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar is one such example. In the U.S., Twitter’s internal communications — revealed in the so-called “Twitter Files” — sparked a debate about political bias and backchannel moderation. Instagram users have repeatedly flagged the increase of graphic content.  Countries are responding to this challenge in very different ways. The European Union is pushing for algorithmic transparency and accountability with its Digital Services Act. The U.S. had taken a hands off approach despite several controversies. In India, the government and law enforcement agencies flag content to be taken down. So, who gets to decide what free speech looks like in the digital age? Is it the government, the platform themselves, or the public? And how do we draw the line between harmful content and healthy debate? Guest:  Dr. Sangeeta Mahapatra, Research Fellow at the German Institute for Global and Area Studies Host: Nivedita VEdited by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian.

Customers of private health insurance policies in India have noticed a worrying trend – their premium costs are shooting up, and, going by the many stories on social media, rejection of claims is also on the rise. Add to this the 18% GST that is charged on premiums, and it is no wonder that many say they are choosing to not renew their policies altogether.Healthcare remains one of those most expensive aspects of an individual’s life in India – with medical inflation rates at 14% and about 60% of the country using private healthcare services, the fear that one episode of illness in a family member could put the family in debt for years, is not unfounded.So what are the regulations around the medical insurance sector in India? Why are health insurance premiums rising? Will the GST Council meeting next month decrease the rates and will this benefit customers? And is health insurance really the right model for universal health coverage in India?Guest: Prof. Indranil Mukopadhyay, Professor and Health Economist, at OP Jindal Global UniversityHost: Zubeda HamidEdited by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian

A new report by the NGO Common Cause and Lokniti- Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS) has surveyed the attitudes towards torture by policemen across India. ‘The Status of Policing in India Report 2025: Police Torture and (Un) Accountability’ has, for the first time, produced empirical data on the justifications for torture that permeates the Indian police.Uniquely, this report approaches torture not from the perspective of human rights activists, but from the standpoint of the most common perpetrator – the police.Among other things, the survey broadly confirms that the police rely on a culture of fear through the use of “tough methods”, justify torture in all kinds of cases, including minor offences, and that support for torture is high in the highest echelons of the police, the IPS officers.Yet the Indian constitution prohibits torture in police custody. What explains this anomaly, and what is the roadmap to get the custodians of the law to respect the law when it comes to torture?Guest: Prakash Singh, former police chief and a leading figure in the advocacy for police reforms in India.Host: G. Sampath, Social Affairs Editor, The HinduRecorded by Aniket Singh Chauhan and Jude WestonEdited by Shivaraj SProduced by Jude Weston

The internet has been flooded with AI-generated images in the style of Studio Ghibli, the animation studio founded by the famous Japanese director Hayao Miyazaki. What made Studio Ghibli’s work so special was not only its distinctive style but also the fact that the images were all hand-drawn.The contrast between the high skill and hard labour of the original Studio Ghibli images and the Ghibli-style pictures churned out by ChatGPT-4o couldn’t be starker.The easy proliferation of Studio Ghibli images through Gen AI has once again put the spotlight on questions about what generative AI means for the working classes, and for the value of their intellectual labour.Is Gen AI another chapter in the history of automation and deskilling? Is it a means to enhance worker surveillance? And what does it mean for the future of the ‘creator-economy’?Guest: Jason Resnikoff, Assistant Professor of Contemporary History at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen in the Netherlands.Host: G. Sampath, Social Affairs Editor, The HinduEdited by Jude Weston

On April 2, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump announced a new set of tariffs against countries that, according to him, charged high tariffs and imposed barriers that made products made in the USA more expensive.These tariffs are essential to Trump’s plan to reduce trade deficits and increase domestic manufacturing.The “baseline” tariff of 10% on imports from all countries came into effect on April 5, 2025. A new set of tariffs would come into effect on April 9.The Trump administration imposed a 26% tariff on imports from India, which is slightly higher than the 20% levy for the European Union, the 24% for Japan and the 25% for South Korea. However, this is lower than the levies on imports from China and other regional manufacturing rivals like Vietnam.Different countries have responded differently to the tariffs. China has announced retaliatory tariffs, the EU offered a ‘zero-for-zero’ deal to the US, while India has gone for a cautious approach. The Department of Commerce said it is “carefully examining” the implications of the tariff announcements.It is also engaging with exporters and other stakeholders and taking feedback on their assessment of the tariffs, and assessing the situation.India and the US are in talks to determine the terms for a mutually beneficial, multi-sectoral Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA).Guest: Dr. Surendar Singh, Associate Professor, Jindal School of Liberal Arts and Humanities, O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat.Host: Nivedita VEdited by Sharmada Venkatasubramanian

Anjali Bhardwaj, a leading advocate for citizens' right to information, discusses how Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act threatens the Right to Information Act in India. She outlines the tension between privacy and transparency, explaining how the new regulations could erode public accountability. Bhardwaj highlights potential consequences for journalists facing penalties for accessing essential information and warns how marginalized communities might suffer from reduced access to governance data. The conversation emphasizes the urgent need for public discourse surrounding these changes.

Usha Ramanathan, a sharp-witted human rights activist, dives into the contentious proposal to link voter IDs with Aadhaar. She raises critical questions about the supposed 'voluntary' nature of this linkage and its potential to lead to voter profiling and disenfranchisement. The discussion also highlights concerns over data privacy and the erosion of voter autonomy, particularly for marginalized communities. Ramanathan critiques the lack of transparency in the UID system and emphasizes the need for a democratic electoral process that prioritizes individual rights.