<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/20221109181140/636be6289c7e80680e08778djpeg.jpg" alt="" width="1200" height="844"/><figcaption>Illustration: BHANU BHATTARAI</figcaption></figure>Social media has given Nepali users unprecedented access to knowledge, opinion and entertainment.But that power is being increasingly misused, by trolling those with a different opinion (especially women), cyber-bullying, assuming false identity, stealing private information and floating wild conspiracy theories.As Nepal’s mobile phone usage grows to 92%, and more than half of those people have smart phones with Internet, many on social media wear a cloak of anonymity even as they share each aspect of their lives with countless others.To be sure, Nepalis can now contact relatives and friends in the diaspora on video chats, and they have the world at their finger tips. But a sharp increase in online abuse has prompted calls for greater media literacy.As elsewhere, <a href="https://www.himalkhabar.com/news/120865?fbclid=IwAR1mXbFy6i6X8MDlnRvvFHNykvxjrTR7g9p2o6NfCE-gIvqXgI9UrAsUWbY" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Nepal’s social web </a>has in recent times been weaponised against those who post dissenting views.In May, actress Barsha Raut posted a video clip on social media calling for diplomatic talks between India and Nepal to solve the Lipulekh dispute. She called out journalists from both countries who used patriotism as an excuse to incite hatred.This should not have been controversial, because patriotism and love of country should not be a reason to spread abuse. But in these polarised times, the veil of anonymity accorded by the net gives people the freedom to threaten and intimidate anyone, especially if they are women like Barsha Raut.The virtual mob that descended upon Raut branded her a traitor, and that was just the most polite adjective used. The backlash was so overwhelming that a disheartened Raut was forced to clarify her stance on the issue and tearfully apologise on social media.Similar posts by male celebrities, journalists and commentators have not elicited such vicious response. Why the selective outrage?In June, actress and film director Deepa Shree Niraula expressed doubts in a tv interview about whether actor Rajesh Hamal should be labeled a 'superstar'. The audience immediately took to the comment section on YouTube to post virulent abuse at her, even threatening to rape and kill her.Social media has given insecure, hidden people the power to express exaggerated outrage, magnifying any incident out of proportion through the algorithm of the ‘like’ and ‘share’ button that has turned the social web into an echo chamber of incremental radicalisation.Who appoints people legends, superstars, national poets, or icons and gives them the label of ‘superstar’? This argument is not new to public discourse in Nepal. As such, anyone has a right to express views on whether or not they think someone is a superstar of Nepali cinema. Such discourse is an example of a functioning democracy and a healthy democratic debate.But why aren't we as a society tolerant and respectful of other people's views?The very existence of social media is a result of a free and fair democracy. But the digital crowd touting freedom of expression to attack and abuse those with different points of view undermines the very democratic values upon which social media was created in the first place.In September, Facebook users in Nepal formed a group 'We Are Rapists' as public anger has grown against the epidemic of rape and domestic violence in Nepal during the pandemic. The Cybercrime Bureau finally arrested those behind the group, who said they did as a prank.According to political analyst and thinker Hari Sharma, accountability has disappeared somewhere along the way as the practice of freedom of expression evolved from traditional media to new media, setting a dangerous precedent. Sharma notes that recent intolerance towards differing opinions has proven that the public is uninformed about social awareness, freedom, and individual rights."Technology is merely a tool," he says. "How we express our opinions on social media mirrors how we live in society at present. It is not realistic to blame intolerance entirely on digital technology.”To be sure, such abuse is not limited to Nepal. Individuals and communities across the world and South Asia have been subject to widespread hate and abuse online. In October, Indian cricket player MS Dhoni's 5-year-old daughter was threatened with rape in 'retaliation' to what people thought was a disappointing performance from Dhoni in this year's chapter of the Indian Premier League (IPL). Police arrested the 16-year-old in Gujarat who made the threat.Here at home, singer and vlogger Samriddhi Rai was viciously trolled for being critical of beauty contests for women and the selection process and criteria.The use of freedom of expression as an excuse to spread hate and incite violence has spread a culture of fear in society. Senior advocate Radheshyam Adhikari notes that while every individual is free to express agreement or disagreement of opinion, no one has the right to attack and abuse anyone else for agreeing or disagreeing with a certain point of view."We must respect any dissenting opinion that as long as it does not advocate violence and hatred," he says.But what if the responses to someone’s opinion spreads violence and hate, should that not be curbed? Indeed, the backlash to any opinion on social media is now so pervasive that it has has had the effect of dampening free expression. Many netizens have just stopped posting anything, or have quit social media platforms altogether.The truth is that we veer between extremes at this stage of digital democracy. The public is quick to idolise one figure and demonise another. We tend to look at things in black and white, as one or the other. This environment is emblematic of the problems that the next generation will it participates in a digital democracy.We seem to be at a crossroads at a time when we should use social media to come together and form new ideas rooted in empathy and understanding. We have the power to make someone 'viral'. We use our own opinions as a valid reason to justify and excuse inexcusable behaviour. We are quick to boycott and 'cancel', without looking at the context, those who we believe have offended our sensibilities.Are we ourselves a part of the cyber society that is dismantling democracy? Are we becoming more digital and less democratic? Is the new public sphere being left to trollers to inhabit?Says women's rights activist Saru Joshi: "The culture of treating differing opinions with disrespect is prevalent in our families, educational institutions, and workplaces. This culture of silence means many pressing social issues are swept to the sidelines on social media. But staying silent will weaken the democratic process.”The solution is better media literacy, enforcement of rules on cyber crime, and for people who want the Internet decontaminated to speak out. And there should be legal remedies against those who abuse the freedom of the net.Says Shiva Gaunle of the Centre for Investigative Journalism: “There is a clear line between criticism and hate. While criticism is a valid way of participating in the democratic process, spreading hatred is anti-social and anti-democratic.”

original

674x448

610x380

500x500

400x266

400x240

400x203

301x200

1084x550

Protecting free speech on Nepal’s cybersphere

<figure><img src="https://superdesk-pro-c.s3.amazonaws.com/sd-nepalitimes/2022110919118/636bed484b0ad905ca02eed6jpeg.jpg" alt="" width="1200" height="844"/><figcaption>Illustration: BHANU BHATTARAI</figcaption></figure>Social media has given Nepali users unprecedented access to knowledge, opinion and entertainment.But that power is being increasingly misused, by trolling those with a different opinion (especially women), cyber-bullying, assuming false identity, stealing private information and floating wild conspiracy theories.As Nepal’s mobile phone usage grows to 92%, and more than half of those people have smart phones with Internet, many on social media wear a cloak of anonymity even as they share each aspect of their lives with countless others.To be sure, Nepalis can now contact relatives and friends in the diaspora on video chats, and they have the world at their finger tips. But a sharp increase in online abuse has prompted calls for greater media literacy.As elsewhere, <a href="https://www.himalkhabar.com/news/120865?fbclid=IwAR1mXbFy6i6X8MDlnRvvFHNykvxjrTR7g9p2o6NfCE-gIvqXgI9UrAsUWbY" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Nepal’s social web </a>has in recent times been weaponised against those who post dissenting views.In May, actress Barsha Raut posted a video clip on social media calling for diplomatic talks between India and Nepal to solve the Lipulekh dispute. She called out journalists from both countries who used patriotism as an excuse to incite hatred.This should not have been controversial, because patriotism and love of country should not be a reason to spread abuse. But in these polarised times, the veil of anonymity accorded by the net gives people the freedom to threaten and intimidate anyone, especially if they are women like Barsha Raut.The virtual mob that descended upon Raut branded her a traitor, and that was just the most polite adjective used. The backlash was so overwhelming that a disheartened Raut was forced to clarify her stance on the issue and tearfully apologise on social media.Similar posts by male celebrities, journalists and commentators have not elicited such vicious response. Why the selective outrage?In June, actress and film director Deepa Shree Niraula expressed doubts in a tv interview about whether actor Rajesh Hamal should be labeled a 'superstar'. The audience immediately took to the comment section on YouTube to post virulent abuse at her, even threatening to rape and kill her.Social media has given insecure, hidden people the power to express exaggerated outrage, magnifying any incident out of proportion through the algorithm of the ‘like’ and ‘share’ button that has turned the social web into an echo chamber of incremental radicalisation.Who appoints people legends, superstars, national poets, or icons and gives them the label of ‘superstar’? This argument is not new to public discourse in Nepal. As such, anyone has a right to express views on whether or not they think someone is a superstar of Nepali cinema. Such discourse is an example of a functioning democracy and a healthy democratic debate.But why aren't we as a society tolerant and respectful of other people's views?The very existence of social media is a result of a free and fair democracy. But the digital crowd touting freedom of expression to attack and abuse those with different points of view undermines the very democratic values upon which social media was created in the first place.In September, Facebook users in Nepal formed a group 'We Are Rapists' as public anger has grown against the epidemic of rape and domestic violence in Nepal during the pandemic. The Cybercrime Bureau finally arrested those behind the group, who said they did as a prank.According to political analyst and thinker Hari Sharma, accountability has disappeared somewhere along the way as the practice of freedom of expression evolved from traditional media to new media, setting a dangerous precedent. Sharma notes that recent intolerance towards differing opinions has proven that the public is uninformed about social awareness, freedom, and individual rights."Technology is merely a tool," he says. "How we express our opinions on social media mirrors how we live in society at present. It is not realistic to blame intolerance entirely on digital technology.”To be sure, such abuse is not limited to Nepal. Individuals and communities across the world and South Asia have been subject to widespread hate and abuse online. In October, Indian cricket player MS Dhoni's 5-year-old daughter was threatened with rape in 'retaliation' to what people thought was a disappointing performance from Dhoni in this year's chapter of the Indian Premier League (IPL). Police arrested the 16-year-old in Gujarat who made the threat.Here at home, singer and vlogger Samriddhi Rai was viciously trolled for being critical of beauty contests for women and the selection process and criteria.The use of freedom of expression as an excuse to spread hate and incite violence has spread a culture of fear in society. Senior advocate Radheshyam Adhikari notes that while every individual is free to express agreement or disagreement of opinion, no one has the right to attack and abuse anyone else for agreeing or disagreeing with a certain point of view."We must respect any dissenting opinion that as long as it does not advocate violence and hatred," he says.But what if the responses to someone’s opinion spreads violence and hate, should that not be curbed? Indeed, the backlash to any opinion on social media is now so pervasive that it has has had the effect of dampening free expression. Many netizens have just stopped posting anything, or have quit social media platforms altogether.The truth is that we veer between extremes at this stage of digital democracy. The public is quick to idolise one figure and demonise another. We tend to look at things in black and white, as one or the other. This environment is emblematic of the problems that the next generation will it participates in a digital democracy.We seem to be at a crossroads at a time when we should use social media to come together and form new ideas rooted in empathy and understanding. We have the power to make someone 'viral'. We use our own opinions as a valid reason to justify and excuse inexcusable behaviour. We are quick to boycott and 'cancel', without looking at the context, those who we believe have offended our sensibilities.Are we ourselves a part of the cyber society that is dismantling democracy? Are we becoming more digital and less democratic? Is the new public sphere being left to trollers to inhabit?Says women's rights activist Saru Joshi: "The culture of treating differing opinions with disrespect is prevalent in our families, educational institutions, and workplaces. This culture of silence means many pressing social issues are swept to the sidelines on social media. But staying silent will weaken the democratic process.”The solution is better media literacy, enforcement of rules on cyber crime, and for people who want the Internet decontaminated to speak out. And there should be legal remedies against those who abuse the freedom of the net.Says Shiva Gaunle of the Centre for Investigative Journalism: “There is a clear line between criticism and hate. While criticism is a valid way of participating in the democratic process, spreading hatred is anti-social and anti-democratic.”

Samsung Nepal has opened pre-orders for the Galaxy A57 5G and A37 5G. Both phones run Samsung’s One UI 8.5, featuring AI capabilities like voice transcription, Circle to Search, and photo editing. They feature a 50MP triple-camera system, a Super AMOLED display, and six years of OS and security updates.

Galaxy A series

Know your Ministers

Prime Minister Balendra Shah on Wednesday broke tradition and met with 17 foreign envoys collectively, a move that was a notable departure from how his predecessors operated.&nbsp;
Shah had already set himself apart by talking less, listening more, and delegating to trusted friends. But by meeting all ambassadors at one go in the presence of the Foreign Ministry, he signalled a paradigm shift in how he wants Nepal to be seen: no longer just balancing India and China, but as a country confident about its <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/opinion/guest-editorial/tripolar-contestation-over-nepal">strategic importance and place in the world</a>.
In just two weeks, the <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/rsp-dos-and-don-ts">RSP has sprung into action </a>on multiple fronts to implement its ambitious 100-point, 100-days action plan. It has taken short-term measures to mitigate the impact of the Gulf war, as well as medium- and long- term measures to streamline the bureaucracy. A few high-profile figures have been made examples of to drive the message home.
Earlier this week, the government recalled six politically appointed ambassadors, the most notable being long-serving Shankar Sharma from New Delhi. The Kathmandu District Court issued arrest warrants against former prime minister Sher Bahadur Deuba and his former foreign minister wife Arzu Rana on charges of money laundering and corruption.
Each ministry has been trying to clean up the accumulated rot from the past three decades: regulatory overhaul of microfinance, education, health and service delivery.&nbsp;
These actions widely disseminated campaign-style on YouTube and TikTok have made most Nepalis hopeful that the party they installed in power means business.
<div class="embed-block"><iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?height=314&href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Freel%2F1279862820757799%2F&show_text=false&width=560&t=0" width="560" height="314" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="true" allow="autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowFullScreen="true"></iframe></div>
BACKLASH
But such attempts to overhaul a long-entrenched political culture were bound to face backlash. In their impatience and enthusiasm to get things done, some of Prime Minister Shah’s ministers have over-reached.
It was common knowledge that government-paid advertising in the mainstream press was kickback-driven, but the PMO’s directive that official notices be published or broadcast only on state-run media has been denounced — especially as the media industry struggles to stay afloat.
More serious are some recent appointments by ministers of relatives and figures closely associated with the RSP to key positions. This has rankled because this party built its political plank on ending nepotism and graft.&nbsp;
News that Home Minister Sudan Gurung allegedly had not paid rent on leased land, which illegally encroached on the lake in Pokhara did not help. &nbsp;
Prime Minister Shah himself has come under scrutiny for appointing a kitchen cabinet full of male buddies from his time as Kathmandu mayor. To douse criticism he brought in as adviser investigative journalist Deepa Dahal, who has exposed corruption in high places of the previous coalitions.&nbsp;
Shah’s appointment of another political adviser Asim Shah to the head Constitution Amendment Task Force, is also seen as problematic. He is a filmmaker and former lawmaker, but does not have a background in constitutional law.&nbsp;
Even more controversial is the Cabinet’s decision to appoint RSP Chair Rabi Lamichhane’s legal counsel, Narayan Kandel, as Attorney General. Kandel used to be a UK permanent resident, and does not have as much experience practicing law in Nepal.&nbsp;
Kandel’s appointment drew flak and raised eyebrows, and with the pending legal cases against Lamichhane this appointment represents a flagrant conflict of interest.
Health Minister Nisha Mehta was also accused of favouritism after reappointing Junu Shrestha, wife of Labour Minister Dipak Kumar Shah, as member of the Health Insurance Board which had earlier suspended her. The Labour Minister’s rambling rant at the Board’s meeting on Tuesday has not helped the RSP’s image.&nbsp;
(UPDATE: On Thursday, Prime Minister Shah sacked the Labour Minister after the RSP found him in breach of the party's code of conduct and discipline. He served 14 days in the Cabinet, one of the shortest tenures for a minister in Nepal )
It is hard to know what <a href="https://nepalitimes.com/news/ball-in-balen-s-court">Balendra Shah is thinking</a>, and how Rabi Lamichhane is going to justify some of these moves. After all, making politics, governance, and bureaucracy a meritocracy has been the core tenet of the RSP, and it risks alienating its mainly youth base if these missteps persist.
But at least for now, most RSP supporters seem to be giving the party the benefit of doubt.

Nepal’s new government springs into action

‘One early morning, we heard the ambassador’s wife cry out, “Ram, Ram, Ram!” A disaster has befallen Nepal!” She had heard on the radio that a fire had consumed Singha Durbar." This is not about the arson attack on 9 September 2025, but the one on 8 July, 1973. It started in the South Wing of the then single-largest building in all of Nepal. It took two days to bring the blaze under control, requiring the use of explosives to demolish one wing to protect the imposing western facade. As Bhekh Bahadur Thapa recalls in the English translation of his memoir A Life in Public Service: Nepal from Autocracy to Democracy, he was then on leave from the Nepal government serving with the IDRC in Ottawa.&nbsp; He had already served as Nepal’s Finance Secretary at age 25, went on to be Finance Minister and Governor of Nepal Rastra Bank. He was already younger than some of the GenZ ministers in Nepal’s present RSP government. Thapa, now 89, was at the launch of the book in February which was attended by former diplomats and bureaucrats. After speeches by panelists, there was a question from the audience about how Thapa had managed to be the diplomat he was, managing Nepal’s international relations on the world stage.&nbsp; Writer and journalist Akhilesh Upadhyay, who was moderating the panel, responded by going into the section of the book where we see Thapa as an ambassador to the US, playing tennis with White House officials, cultivating a network of contacts to project the identity and welfare of Nepal, and making it possible for a state visit by King Birendra to Ronald Reagan’s America. The book is full of anecdotes that suggest Thapa was a clever and strategic diplomat, always calm and unruffled, easily making friends in high places with his maturity and engaging sense of humour. Thapa’s memoir is heavy on details about Nepal’s administrative history during the years he was active in public service, serving as minister and ambassador under three kings: Mahendra, Birendra and Gyanendra, and alongside five prime ministers.&nbsp; Aside from an insider look on how certain treaties, development deals and research projects in Nepal came into fruition, Thapa goes into great detail about his personal and professional relationships with the kings, ministers, ambassadors, foreign leaders and politicians.&nbsp; As a reader, one is struck by the level of detail around the events that unfolded in Nepal over the years during Thapa’s tenure. Was Thapa recording a journal over the years of the events and the conversations that transpired, or were they committed to his phenomenal memory? Either way, the reader gets a glimpse of Nepal’s recent history from the early days of the Panchayat, through the People’s Movement and the democracy period, the Maoist insurgency, Royal Palace massacre of 2001, and Gyanendra’s coup of 2005.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/2026041204048_125dc8ae300a1e33124f394abe724d42727f83e067b0201d2008b58d60c459a4.jpg" data-media-id="editor_0" data-image-id="2026041204048_125dc8ae300a1e33124f394abe724d42727f83e067b0201d2008b58d60c459a4" data-rendition-name="original" width="1584" height="1000" loading="lazy" alt="How to win friends and influence nations NT"> </figure>  Not enough is said about the political parties of the time whose presence led to the way Nepal’s multiparty democracy came to be shaped. The book keeps its focus on the administration and the key figures around it, mostly those in the Panchayat era. Towards the second half of the book, we do start to hear about political parties, but not in great depth. Another figure whose presence in the book is conspicuously less prominent is that of his wife, Rita Thapa — the person who seems to have rescued him every time financial quandary or family care became a challenge. Yet, we do not see her as a full person. Perhaps because of the personal tragedies in his life, the children are also barely mentioned.&nbsp; The book is therefore less personal and more technical. Throughout, we learn about Thapa’s thinking as he navigated the world of diplomacy to win him the trust of those who mattered. There are tips here for a new generation of Nepali officials and diplomats about how much commitment and focus is needed to be good at one’s job and serve the national interest. This book adds to tomes that have been written on Nepal’s fragile relationship with India. ‘India has always wished for Nepal to remain dependent on it,’ writes Thapa, who served as Nepal’s ambassador to India and later in the Eminent Persons Group &nbsp;on Indo-Nepal relations that has been allowed to languish. The book has several insights into the Indo-Nepal trysts with diplomacy and agency.&nbsp; China’s role is also recorded, viewed through conversations during a visit to Beijing, but all that was before Nepal’s neighbour to the north emerged as a world economic and military power. The book also has such sudden instances of quirkiness and humour. For instance, we see a young Thapa in America explaining to a government official why he would like to return to Nepal instead of settling down in the US. “Because, Nepal is beautiful,” he said. The text is immaculate and does not read much like a translation, credit for which clearly goes to the team that put the edition together: translator Prawin Adhikari, &nbsp;Anagha Neelakanthan and Bhekh Thapa’s daughter, Manjushree. As Nepal enters a new era of governance and diplomacy, A Life in Public Service: Nepal from Autocracy to Democracy should be essential reading for students of political science, economics and foreign affairs who can gain a fresh perspective on the country’s trajectory.&nbsp; There are dozens of forgotten state secrets recorded in the book, but the reader must also remember this is a story told from one person’s perspective and there may be others.&nbsp; So, what really made Thapa the diplomat he was? I met him in 2004 at the Kantipur TV studio when he was serving as king Gyanendra’s foreign minister. He was there for a studio interview, and I was just done with my English newscast.&nbsp; He surprised me at the door: “Pratibha! I’ve been reading your articles in The Kathmandu Post. You must keep writing.” I thanked him, glad to have been noticed for my work by a stranger. That was perhaps one of the things that set Thapa apart — he excelled at staying close to those in power, while also noticing those who were not.  <figure> <img src="https://publisher-publish.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/pb-nepalitimes/swp/asv65r/media/20260412040412_213e706136a038ec9f5e2b8c6d7f7c1e9ceed9479e22fe2884872ad7bd20955f.jpg" data-media-id="editor_1" data-image-id="20260412040412_213e706136a038ec9f5e2b8c6d7f7c1e9ceed9479e22fe2884872ad7bd20955f" data-rendition-name="original" width="1136" height="702" loading="lazy" alt="Book details"> </figure>

women-in-nepal

Protecting free speech on Nepal’s cybersphere

Protecting free speech on Nepal’s cybersphere

Galaxy A series

Know your Ministers

Nepal’s new government springs into action

How to win friends and influence nations