Most of the arguments about 'India has a poor record of acting against MNCs' doesn't take the effort to provide examples and explain their argument. Most examples fall into the following baskets:
* Poorly conceived law that faces legal challenges and gets struck down in courts, i.e. fails the basic test of constitutional validity. This is a problem with drafting the law.
* Poor representation by GoI in legal cases, e.g. Minhaz Merchant in a recent article
* Poorly conceived law that does bizarre things like retrospective taxation, that gets struck down in external arbitration.
There's a trend here - often the government implements laws and rules badly. Knee-jerk bans fall in this category. The executive can order anything, but at some point the lawyers will step in and have it invalidated . Then people hyperventilate and demand more. This is stupid. Don't demand things that are easily invalidated by lawyers, that just cause you to get even more angry at it. Please step back and think.
There's very little anecdotal history of the government devising a good law, that someone just won't follow. Nobody is that big. A well crafted set of laws will treat SM with the same rigor as foreign print media. It will completely redo the implicit Section 230 privileges that American SM platforms claim, and instead impose Indian rules. Data and analytics locality, controlled by APIs that the Indian government can use, will ensure the ability to act and punish. There should be no free ability to monetize analytics with Indian data in India. The data cannot be monetized outside India, nor can it be transferred. The structure of the law makes it simple for the government to apply and collect a fine, but harder for the SM entity to just defiantly refuse, because they don't hold such cards, as they do now.
So please, step back and think how policy and execution here can work. Seeking instant gratification solutions is not the answer.