Advisory for APS School Students
Pretext
The Army Welfare Education Society has informed the Parents and students that a Scam is targeting the Army schools Students. The Scamster approaches the students by faking the voice of a female and a male. The scamster asks for the personal information and photos of the students by telling them they are taking details for the event, which is being organised by the Army welfare education society for the celebration of independence day. The Army welfare education society intimated that Parents to beware of these calls from scammers.
The students of Army Schools of Jammu & Kashmir, Noida, are getting calls from the scamster. The students were asked to share sensitive information. Students across the country are getting calls and WhatsApp messages from two numbers, which end with 1715 and 2167. The Scamster are posing to be teachers and asking for the students’ names on the pretext of adding them to the WhatsApp Groups. The scamster then sends forms links to the WhatsApp groups and asking students to fill out the form to seek more sensitive information.
Do’s
- Do Make sure to verify the caller.
- Do block the caller while finding it suspicious.
- Do be careful while sharing personal Information.
- Do inform the School Authorities while receiving these types of calls and messages posing to be teachers.
- Do Check the legitimacy of any agency and organisation while telling the details
- Do Record Calls asking for personal information.
- Do inform parents about scam calling.
- Do cross-check the caller and ask for crucial information.
- Do make others aware of the scam.
Don’ts
- Don’t answer anonymous calls or unknown calls from anyone.
- Don’t share personal information with anyone.
- Don’t Share OTP with anyone.
- Don’t open suspicious links.
- Don’t fill any forms, asking for personal information
- Don’t confirm your identity until you know the caller.
- Don’t Reply to messages asking for financial information.
- Don’t go to a fake website by following a prompt call.
- Don’t share bank Details and passwords.
- Don’t Make payment over a prompt fake call.
Related Blogs
Misinformation is a scourge in the digital world, making the most mundane experiences fraught with risk. The threat is considerably heightened in conflict settings, especially in the modern era, where geographical borders blur and civilians and conflict actors alike can take to the online realm to discuss -and influence- conflict events. Propaganda can complicate the narrative and distract from the humanitarian crises affecting civilians, while also posing a serious threat to security operations and law and order efforts. Sensationalised reports of casualties and manipulated portrayals of military actions contribute to a cycle of violence and suffering.
A study conducted by MIT found the mere thought of sharing news on social media reduced the ability to judge whether a story was true or false; the urge to share outweighed the consideration of accuracy (2023). Cross-border misinformation has become a critical issue in today's interconnected world, driven by the rise of digital communication platforms. To effectively combat misinformation, coordinated international policy frameworks and cooperation between governments, platforms, and global institutions are created.
The Global Nature of Misinformation
Cross-border misinformation is false or misleading information that spreads across countries. Out-of-border creators amplify information through social media and digital platforms and are a key source of misinformation. Misinformation can interfere with elections, and create serious misconceptions about health concerns such as those witnessed during the COVID-19 pandemic, or even lead to military conflicts.
The primary challenge in countering cross-border misinformation is the difference in national policies, legal frameworks and governance policies of social media platforms across various jurisdictions. Examining the existing international frameworks, such as cybersecurity treaties and data-sharing agreements used for financial crimes might be helpful to effectively address cross-border misinformation. Adapting these approaches to the digital information ecosystem, nations could strengthen their collective response to the spread of misinformation across borders. Global institutions like the United Nations or regional bodies like the EU and ASEAN can work together to set a unified response and uniform international standards for regulation dealing with misinformation specifically.
Current National and Regional Efforts
Many countries have taken action to deal with misinformation within their borders. Some examples include:
- The EU’s Digital Services Act has been instrumental in regulating online intermediaries and platforms including marketplaces, social networks, content-sharing platforms, app stores, etc. The legislation aims to prevent illegal and harmful activities online and the spread of disinformation.
- The primary legislation that governs cyberspace in India is the IT Act of 2000 and its corresponding rules (IT Rules, 2023), which impose strict requirements on social media platforms to counter misinformation content and enable the traceability of the creator responsible for the origin of misinformation. Platforms have to conduct due diligence, failing which they risk losing their safe harbour protection. The recently-enacted DPDP Act of 2023 indirectly addresses personal data misuse that can be used to contribute to the creation and spread of misinformation. Also, the proposed Digital India Act is expected to focus on “user harms” specific to the online world.
- In the U.S., the Right to Editorial Discretion and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act place the responsibility for regulating misinformation on private actors like social media platforms and social media regulations. The US government has not created a specific framework addressing misinformation and has rather encouraged voluntary measures by SMPs to have independent policies to regulate misinformation on their platforms.
The common gap area across these policies is the absence of a standardised, global framework for addressing cross-border misinformation which results in uneven enforcement and dependence on national regulations.
Key Challenges in Achieving International Cooperation
Some of the key challenges identified in achieving international cooperation to address cross-border misinformation are as follows:
- Geopolitical tensions can emerge due to the differences in political systems, priorities, and trust issues between countries that hinder attempts to cooperate and create a universal regulation.
- The diversity in approaches to internet governance and freedom of speech across countries complicates the matters further.
- Further complications arise due to technical and legal obstacles around the issues of sovereignty, jurisdiction and enforcement, further complicating matters relating to the monitoring and removal of cross-border misinformation.
CyberPeace Recommendations
- The UN Global Principles For Information Integrity Recommendations for Multi-stakeholder Action, unveiled on 24 June 2024, are a welcome step for addressing cross-border misinformation. This can act as the stepping stone for developing a framework for international cooperation on misinformation, drawing inspiration from other successful models like climate change agreements, international criminal law framework etc.
- Collaborations like public-private partnerships between government, tech companies and civil societies can help enhance transparency, data sharing and accountability in tackling cross-border misinformation.
- Engaging in capacity building and technology transfers in less developed countries would help to create a global front against misinformation.
Conclusion
We are in an era where misinformation knows no borders and the need for international cooperation has never been more urgent. Global democracies are exploring solutions, both regulatory and legislative, to limit the spread of misinformation, however, these fragmented efforts fall short of addressing the global scale of the problem. Establishing a standardised, international framework, backed by multilateral bodies like the UN and regional alliances, can foster accountability and facilitate shared resources in this fight. Through collaborative action, transparent regulations, and support for developing nations, the world can create a united front to curb misinformation and protect democratic values, ensuring information integrity across borders.
References
- https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2023-10/A%20Model%20of%20Online%20Misinformation.pdf
- https://www.indiatoday.in/global/story/in-the-crosshairs-manufacturing-consent-and-the-erosion-of-public-trust-2620734-2024-10-21
- https://laweconcenter.org/resources/knowledge-and-decisions-in-the-information-age-the-law-economics-of-regulating-misinformation-on-social-media-platforms/
- https://www.article19.org/resources/un-article-19-global-principles-for-information-integrity/
Introduction
Intricate and winding are the passageways of the modern digital age, a place where the reverberations of truth effortlessly blend, yet hauntingly contrast, with the echoes of falsehood. The latest thread in this fabric of misinformation is a claim that has scurried through the virtual windows of social media platforms, gaining the kind of traction that is both revelatory and alarming of our times. It is a narrative that speaks to the heart of India's cultural and religious fabric—the construction of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya, a project enshrined in the collective consciousness of a nation and steeped in historical significance.
The claim in question, a spectre of misinformation, suggests that the Ram Temple's construction has been covertly shifted 3 kilometres from its original, hallowed ground—the birthplace, as it were, of Lord Ram. This assertion, which spread through the echo chambers of social media, has been bolstered by a screenshot of Google Maps, a digital cartographer that has accidentally become a pawn in this game of truth and deception. The image purports to showcase the location of Ram Mandir as distinct and distant from the site where the Babri Masjid once stood, a claim went viral on social media and has caught the public's reactions.
The Viral Tempest
In the face of such a viral tempest, IndiaTV's fact-checking arm, IndiaTVFactCheck, has stepped into the fray, wielding the sword of veracity against the Goliath of falsehood. Their investigation into this viral claim was meticulous, a deep dive into the digital representations that have fueled this controversy. Upon examining the viral Google Maps screenshot, they noticed markings at two locations: one labelled as Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Temple and the other as Babri Masjid. The latter, upon closer inspection and with the aid of Google's satellite prowess, was revealed to be the Shri Sita-Ram Birla Temple, a place of worship that stands in quiet dignity, far removed from the contentious whispers of social media.
The truth, as it often does, lay buried beneath layers of user-generated content on Google Maps, where the ability to tag any location with a name has sometimes led to the dissemination of incorrect information. This can be corrected, of course, but not before it has woven itself into the fabric of public discourse. The fact-check by IndiaTV revealed that the location mentioned in the viral screenshot is, indeed, the Shri Sita-Ram Birla Temple and the Ram Temple is being constructed at its original, intended site.
This revelation is not merely a victory for truth over falsehood but also a testament to the resilience of facts in the face of a relentless onslaught of misinformation. It is a reminder that the digital realm, for all its wonders, is also a shadowy theatre where narratives are constructed and deconstructed with alarming ease. The very basis of all the fake narratives that spread around significant events, such as the consecration ceremony of the Ram Temple, is the manipulation of truth, the distortion of reality to serve nefarious ends of spreading misinformation.
Fake Narratives; Misinformation
Consider the elaborate fake narratives spun around the ceremony, where hours have been spent on the internet building a web of deceit. Claims such as 'Mandir wahan nahin banaya gaya' (The temple is not being built at the site of the demolition) and the issuance of new Rs 500 notes for the Ram Mandir were some pieces of misinformation that went viral on social media amid the preparations for the consecration ceremony. These repetitive claims, albeit differently worded, were spread to further a single narrative on the internet, a phenomenon that a study published in Nature said could be attributed to people taking some peripheral cues as signals for truth, which can increase with repetition.
The misinformation incidents surrounding the Ram Temple in Ayodhya are a microcosm of the larger battle between truth and misinformation. The false claims circulating online assert that the ongoing construction is not taking place at the original Babri Masjid site but rather 3 kilometres away. This misinformation, shared widely on social media has been debunked upon closer examination. The claim is based on a screenshot of Google Maps showing two locations: the construction site of the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Temple and another spot labeled 'Babar Masjid permanently closed' situated 3 kilometers away. The assertion questions the legitimacy of demolishing the Babri Masjid if the temple is being built elsewhere. However, a thorough fact-check reveals the claim to be entirely unfounded.
Deep Scrutiny
Upon scrutiny, the screenshot indicates that the second location marked as 'Babar Masjid' is, in fact, the Sita-Ram Birla Temple in Ayodhya. This is verified by comparing the Google Maps satellite image with the actual structure of the Birla Temple. Notably, the viral screenshot misspells 'Babri Masjid' as 'Babar Masjid,' casting doubt on its credibility. Satellite images from Google Earth Pro clearly depict the construction of a temple-like structure at the precise coordinates of the original Babri Masjid demolition site (26°47'43.74'N 82°11'38.77'E). Comparing old and new satellite images further confirms that major construction activities began in 2011, aligning with the initiation of the Ram Temple construction.
Moreover, existing photographs of the Babri Masjid, though challenging to precisely match, share essential structural elements with the current construction site, reinforcing the location as the original site of the mosque. Hence the viral claim that the Ram Temple is being constructed 3 kilometers away from the Babri Masjid site is indubitably false. Evidence from historical photographs, satellite images and google images conclusively refute this misinformation, attesting that the temple construction is indeed taking place at the same location as the original Babri Masjid.
Viral Misinformation: A false claim based on a misleading Google Maps screenshot suggests the Ram Temple construction in Ayodhya has been covertly shifted 3 kilometres away from its original Babri Masjid site.
Fact Check Revealed: IndiaTVFactCheck debunked the misinformation, confirming that the viral screenshot actually showed the Shri Sita-Ram Birla Temple, not the Babri Masjid site. The Ram Temple is indeed being constructed at its original, intended location, exposing the falsehood of the claim.
Conclusion
The case of the Ram Temple is a pitiful reminder of the power of misinformation and the significance of fact-checking in preserving the integrity of truth. It is a clarion call to question, to uphold the integrity of facts in a world increasingly stymied in the murky waters of falsehoods. Widespread misinformation highlights the critical role of fact-checking in dispelling false narratives. It serves as a reminder of the ongoing battle between truth and misinformation in the digital age, emphasising the importance of upholding the integrity of facts for a more informed society.
References
- https://www.indiatvnews.com/fact-check/fact-check-is-ram-temple-being-built-3-km-away-from-the-birthplace-here-truth-behind-viral-claim-2024-01-19-912633
- https://www.thequint.com/news/webqoof/misinformation-spread-around-events-ayodhya-ram-mandir-g20-elections-bharat-jodo-yatra
Introduction
Twitter Inc.’s appeal against barring orders for specific accounts issued by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology was denied by a single judge on the Karnataka High Court. Twitter Inc. was also given an Rs. 50 lakh fine by Justice Krishna Dixit, who claimed the social media corporation had approached the court defying government directives.
As a foreign corporation, Twitter’s locus standi had been called into doubt by the government, which said they were ineligible to apply Articles 19 and 21 to their situation. Additionally, the government claimed that because Twitter was only designed to serve as an intermediary, there was no “jural relationship” between Twitter and its users.
The Issue
In accordance with Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, the Ministry issued the directives. Nevertheless, Twitter had argued in its appeal that the orders “fall foul of Section 69A both substantially and procedurally.” Twitter argued that in accordance with 69A, account holders were to be notified before having their tweets and accounts deleted. However, the Ministry failed to provide these account holders with any notices.
On June 4, 2022, and again on June 6, 2022, the government sent letters to Twitter’s compliance officer requesting that they come before them and provide an explanation for why the Blocking Orders were not followed and why no action should be taken against them.
Twitter replied on June 9 that the content against which it had not followed the blocking orders does not seem to be a violation of Section 69A. On June 27, 2022, the Government issued another notice stating Twitter was violating its directions. On June 29, Twitter replied, asking the Government to reconsider the direction on the basis of the doctrine of proportionality. On June 30, 2022, the Government withdrew blocking orders on ten account-level URLs but gave an additional list of 27 URLs to be blocked. On July 10, more accounts were blocked. Compiling the orders “under protest,” Twitter approached the HC with the petition challenging the orders.
Legality
Additionally, the government claimed that because Twitter was only designed to serve as an intermediary, there was no “jural relationship” between Twitter and its users.
Government attorney Additional Solicitor General R Sankaranarayanan argued that tweets mentioning “Indian Occupied Kashmir” and the survival of LTTE commander Velupillai Prabhakaran were serious enough to undermine the integrity of the nation.
Twitter, on the other hand, claimed that its users have pushed for these rights. Additionally, Twitter maintained that under Article 14 of the Constitution, even as a foreign company, they were entitled to certain rights, such as the right to equality. They also argued that the reason for the account blocking in each case was not stated and that Section 69a’s provision for blocking a URL should only apply to the offending URL rather than the entire account because blocking the entire account would prevent the creation of information while blocking the offending tweet only applied to already-created information.
Conclusion
The evolution of cyberspace has been substantiated by big tech companies like Facebook, Google, Twitter, Amazon and many more. These companies have been instrumental in leading the spectrum of emerging technologies and creating a blanket of ease and accessibility for users. Compliance with laws and policies is of utmost priority for the government, and the new bills and policies are empowering the Indian cyberspace. Non Compliance will be taken very seriously, and the same is legalised under the Intermediary Guidelines 2021 and 2022 by Meity. Referring to Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, which pertains to an exemption from liability of intermediary in some instances, it was said, “Intermediary is bound to obey the orders which the designate authority/agency which the government fixes from time to time.”