The impacts of the new controversial IT rules have started to show up — the first instances stemming from the issues over compliance and setting up of required structure itself. The chaos created by the removal of intermediary status from Twitter is indeed a consequence of hushed deliberations with which the rules have come into force. The removal of intermediary status and, hence, the safe harbour provision is more serious than it may seem. The course of actions taken by the Government and Twitter will determine the distinction between the notion of norms and oddities in the implementation process of the rules in future. In effect, the Government's move practically means that Twitter will be treated as a publisher for the time being rather than an intermediary. This is the difference between heaven and earth. The implications of the move are far-reaching. As a publisher, Twitter will now be liable to hold editorial responsibility for the content published over the platform. In the first place, is it even practically possible and feasible in a short notice period? Evidently, not. So, while Twitter is not equipped enough for holding out this mammoth editorial exercise, it will still be liable for legal actions for not doing so. Can just an order from the top change the intrinsic reality on the ground? Twitter may lose the tag of intermediary on paper but, technically, it will still remain the same. The Internet Foundation of India has said that safe harbour provision under section 79 of the IT Act is a "technical qualification" and is not granted by the government. One may ask if it is even meaningful to withdraw the tag? Twitter employees from top to bottom, for the time being, are left prone to manipulation and unnecessary legal dragging. The other issue is of contradiction arising from the government's move. How is it possible that two firms — one is Twitter and take the other as one of the companies of similar nature that have complied, say Facebook — will be bestowed differential treatment within the purview of law? Given the large fraction of society that is engaged with these platforms, the Government's move will create more chaos than providing solutions. The government is of the conviction that Twitter has "deliberately" not obeyed the new rules despite being given grace time. It has also tried to set it aloof by pointing out that other social media companies have followed the provisions of deploying officials mandated within the new IT rules. There is a possibility that technicalities involved in compliance may have hindered the process for Twitter. Also, considering the complexity of the task, the Government could have considered showing a little extra "grace" for extending the compliance timeline, rather than resorting to extreme measures abruptly. After all, Twitter has at no point in time suggested that it is not willing to comply with the government rules. Twitter's response to the lifting of intermediary status has been in a conciliatory and submissive tone. It has even clarified that the process of instituting compliance officers is on and an announcement would be made soon. Taking all these into consideration, nothing explains the Government's high-handed approach in the matter. It can be pondered over what explains the swiftness with which the new rules are aimed to be implemented. It is also pertinent here to mention that the IT rules are challenged before several courts for being "unconstitutional". The swiftness in policymaking and implementation is, however, a desired trait and should certainly be applied to all areas of concern! A parallel but related event of FIR against Twitter Inc. and Twitter Communication India Pvt., among others, for not taking down a content that the Ghaziabad police is convinced is "manipulated" and could cause communal disharmony. It was a video of an old man alleging that a person had beaten him up and asked to chant Jai Shri Ram, his statement to Ghaziabad police did not match with the old man's allegations in the video. It is indeed a matter of shame that the country's once strong communal fabric has touched so low that its "communal harmony" could be imbalanced by every small and frivolous incident. The meek communal balance is not at all reflective of India's rich cultural history. At most, this is the travesty of the same — a façade. Things are already so tangled over the New IT rules. The Government should look into the matter and holistically resolve the issues. Its stubborn approach at this time will further complicate the situation. Even if the matters are forced to subside, for the time being, they will come back plagued with greater loopholes in the future. It would reflect well upon the government to see what difficulties social media companies are facing in ensuring compliance with the rules that have overhauled the entire internet space. Smooth and effective compliance will come only from constructive horizontal deliberation, and not from any abrupt top-down administrative order. At the same time, there is also a need to resolve other aspects of the new rules challenged in several courts to ensure that compliance remains consistent.