#Fact Check-Misleading Newspaper from Kerala stating ban on paper currency

Introduction 

Prebunking is a technique that shifts the focus from directly challenging falsehoods or telling people what they need to believe to understanding how people are manipulated and misled online to begin with. It is a growing field of research that aims to help people resist persuasion by misinformation. Prebunking, or "attitudinal inoculation," is a way to teach people to spot and resist manipulative messages before they happen.  The crux of the approach is rooted in taking a step backwards and nipping the problem in the bud by deepening our understanding of it, instead of designing redressal mechanisms to tackle it after the fact. It has been proven effective in helping a wide range of people build resilience to misleading information.

Prebunking is a psychological strategy for countering the effect of misinformation with the goal of assisting individuals in identifying and resisting deceptive content, hence increasing resilience against future misinformation. Online manipulation is a complex issue, and multiple approaches are needed to curb its worst effects. Prebunking provides an opportunity to get ahead of online manipulation, providing a layer of protection before individuals encounter malicious content. Prebunking aids individuals in discerning and refuting misleading arguments, thus enabling them to resist a variety of online manipulations. 

Prebunking builds mental defenses for misinformation by providing warnings and counterarguments before people encounter malicious content. Inoculating people against false or misleading information is a powerful and effective method for building trust and understanding along with a personal capacity for discernment and fact-checking. Prebunking teaches people how to separate facts from myths by teaching them the importance of thinking in terms of ‘how you know what you know’ and consensus-building. Prebunking uses examples and case studies to explain the types and risks of misinformation so that individuals can apply these learnings to reject false claims and manipulation in the future as well. 

How Prebunking Helps Individuals Spot Manipulative Messages

Prebunking helps individuals identify manipulative messages by providing them with the necessary tools and knowledge to recognize common techniques used to spread misinformation. Successful prebunking strategies include;

1. Warnings;
2. Preemptive Refutation: It explains the narrative/technique and how particular information is manipulative in structure. The Inoculation treatment messages typically include 2-3 counterarguments and their refutations. An effective rebuttal provides the viewer with skills to fight any erroneous or misleading information they may encounter in the future.
3. Micro-dosing: A weakened or practical example of misinformation that is innocuous. 

All these alert individuals to potential manipulation attempts. Prebunking also offers weakened examples of misinformation, allowing individuals to practice identifying deceptive content. It activates mental defenses, preparing individuals to resist persuasion attempts. Misinformation can exploit cognitive biases: people tend to put a lot of faith in things they’ve heard repeatedly - a fact that malicious actors manipulate by flooding the Internet with their claims to help legitimise them by creating familiarity. The ‘prebunking’ technique helps to create resilience against misinformation and protects our minds from the harmful effects of misinformation. 

Prebunking essentially helps people control the information they consume by teaching them how to discern between accurate and deceptive content. It enables one to develop critical thinking skills, evaluate sources adequately and identify red flags. By incorporating these components and strategies, prebunking enhances the ability to spot manipulative messages, resist deceptive narratives, and make informed decisions when navigating the very dynamic and complex information landscape online.

CyberPeace Policy Recommendations

• Preventing and fighting misinformation necessitates joint efforts between different stakeholders. The government and policymakers should sponsor prebunking initiatives and information literacy programmes to counter misinformation and adopt systematic approaches. Regulatory frameworks should encourage accountability in the dissemination of online information on various platforms. Collaboration with educational institutions, technological companies and civil society organisations can assist in the implementation of prebunking techniques in a variety of areas.
• Higher educational institutions should support prebunking and media literacy and offer professional development opportunities for educators, and scholars by working with academics and professionals on the subject of misinformation by producing research studies on the grey areas and challenges associated with misinformation.
• Technological companies and social media platforms should improve algorithm transparency, create user-friendly tools and resources, and work with fact-checking organisations to incorporate fact-check labels and tools.
• Civil society organisations and NGOs should promote digital literacy campaigns to spread awareness on misinformation and teach prebunking strategies and critical information evaluation. Training programmes should be available to help people recognise and resist deceptive information using prebunking tactics. Advocacy efforts should support legislation or guidelines that support and encourage prebunking efforts and promote media literacy as a basic skill in the digital landscape. 
• Media outlets and journalists including print & social media should follow high journalistic standards and engage in fact-checking activities to ensure information accuracy before release. Collaboration with prebunking professionals, cyber security experts, researchers and advocacy analysts can result in instructional content and initiatives that promote media literacy, prebunking strategies and misinformation awareness.

Final Words

The World Economic Forum's Global Risks Report 2024 identifies misinformation and disinformation as the top most significant risks for the next two years. Misinformation and disinformation are rampant in today’s digital-first reality, and the ever-growing popularity of social media is only going to see the challenges compound further. It is absolutely imperative for all netizens and stakeholders  to adopt proactive approaches to counter the growing problem of misinformation. Prebunking is a powerful problem-solving tool in this regard because it aims at ‘protection through prevention’ instead of limiting the strategy to harm reduction and redressal.  We can draw parallels with the concept of vaccination or inoculation, reducing the probability of a misinformation infection. Prebunking exposes us to a weakened form of misinformation and provides ways to identify it, reducing the chance false information takes root in our psyches.

The most compelling attribute of this approach is that the focus is not only on preventing damage but also creating widespread ownership and citizen participation in the problem-solving process. Every empowered individual creates an additional layer of protection against the scourge of misinformation, not only making safer choices for themselves but also lowering the risk of spreading false claims to others.  

References

• [1] https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_The_Global_Risks_Report_2024.pdf
• [2] https://prebunking.withgoogle.com/docs/A_Practical_Guide_to_Prebunking_Misinformation.pdf
• [3] https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/17634/3565

‍

Introduction

On March 12, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) proposed the Bill to curb anti-competitive practices of tech giants through ex-ante regulation. The Draft Digital Competition Bill is to apply to ‘Core Digital Services,’ with the Central Government having the authority to update the list periodically. The proposed list in the Bill encompasses online search engines, online social networking services, video-sharing platforms, interpersonal communications services, operating systems, web browsers, cloud services, advertising services, and online intermediation services. 

The primary highlight of the Digital Competition Law Report created by the Committee on Digital Competition Law presented to the Parliament in the 2nd week of March 2024 involves a recommendation to introduce new legislation called the ‘Digital Competition Act,’ intended to strike a balance between certainty and flexibility. The report identified ten anti-competitive practices relevant to digital enterprises in India. These are anti-steering, platform neutrality/self-preferencing, bundling and tying, data usage (use of non-public data), pricing/ deep discounting, exclusive tie-ups, search and ranking preferencing, restricting third-party applications and finally advertising Policies.

Key Take-Aways: Digital Competition Bill, 2024

1. Qualitative and quantitative criteria for identifying Systematically Significant Digital Enterprises, if it meets any of the specified thresholds. 

• Financial thresholds in each of the immediately preceding three financial years like turnover in India, global turnover, gross merchandise value in India, or global market capitalization.
• User thresholds in each of the immediately preceding 3 financial years in India like the core digital service provided by the enterprise has at least 1 crore end users, or it has at least 10,000 business users.
• The Commission may make the designation based on other factors such as the size and resources of an enterprise, number of business or end users, market structure and size, scale and scope of activities of an enterprise and any other relevant factor.

2. A period of 90 days is provided to notify the CCI of qualification as an SSDE. Additionally, the enterprise must also notify the Commission of other enterprises within the group that are directly or indirectly involved in the provision of Core Digital Services, as Associate Digital Enterprises (ADE) and the qualification shall be for 3 years.
3. It prescribes obligations for SSDEs and their ADEs upon designation. The enterprise must comply with certain obligations regarding Core Digital Services, and non-compliance with the same shall result in penalties. Enterprises must not directly or indirectly prevent or restrict business users or end users from raising any issue of non-compliance with the enterprise’s obligations under the Act. 
4. Avoidance of favouritism in product offerings by SSDE,  its related parties, or third parties for the manufacture and sale of products or provision of services over those offered by third-party business users on the Core Digital Service in any manner.
5. The Commission will be having the same powers as vested to a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 when trying a suit.
6. Penalty for non-compliance without reasonable cause may extend to Rs 1 lakh for each day during which such non-compliance occurs (max. of Rs 10 crore). It may extend to 3 years or with a fine, which may extend to Rs 25 crore or with both. The Commission may also pass an order imposing a penalty on an enterprise (not exceeding 1% of the global turnover) in case it provides incorrect, incomplete, misleading information or fails to provide information. 

Suggestions and Recommendations

• The ex-ante model of regulation needs to be examined for the Indian scenario and studies need to be conducted on it has worked previously in different jurisdictions like the EU. 
• The Bill should be aimed at prioritising the fostering of fair competition by preventing monopolistic practices in digital markets exclusively. A clear distinction from the already existing Competition Act, 2002 in its functioning needs to be created so that there is no overlap in the regulations and double jeopardy is not created for enterprises.
• Restrictions on tying and bundling and data usage have been shown to negatively impact MSMEs that rely significantly on big tech to reduce operational costs and enhance customer outreach.
• Clear definitions of "dominant position" and "anti-competitive behaviour" are essential for effective enforcement in terms of digital competition need to be defined. 
• Encouraging innovation while safeguarding consumer data privacy in consonance with the DPDP Act should be the aim. Promoting interoperability and transparency in algorithms can prevent discriminatory practices. 
• Regular reviews and stakeholder consultations will ensure the law adapts to rapidly evolving technologies. 
• Collaboration with global antitrust bodies which is aimed at enhancing cross-border regulatory coherence and effectiveness.

Conclusion

The need for a competition law that is focused exclusively on Digital Enterprises is the need of the hour and hence the Committee recommended enacting the Digital Competition Act to enable CCI to selectively regulate large digital enterprises. The proposed legislation should be restricted to regulate only those enterprises that have a significant presence and ability to influence the Indian digital market. The impact of the law needs to be restrictive to digital enterprises and it should not encroach upon matters not influenced by the digital arena. India's proposed Digital Competition Bill aims to promote competition and fairness in the digital market by addressing anti-competitive practices and dominant position abuses prevalent in the digital business space. The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has received 41-page public feedback on the draft which is expected to be tabled next year in front of the Parliament. 

References

1. https://www.medianama.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/DRAFT-DIGITAL-COMPETITION-BILL-2024.pdf
2. https://prsindia.org/files/policy/policy_committee_reports/Report_Summary-Digital_Competition_Law.pdf
3. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/startups/meity-meets-india-inc-to-hear-out-digital-competition-law-concerns/articleshow/111091837.cms?from=mdr
4. https://www.mca.gov.in/bin/dms/getdocument?mds=gzGtvSkE3zIVhAuBe2pbow%253D%253D&type=open
5. https://www.barandbench.com/law-firms/view-point/digital-competition-laws-beginning-of-a-new-era
6. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/policy-explainer-digital-competition-bill-nimisha-srivastava-lhltc/
7. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=5722a078-1839-4ece-aec9-49336ff53b6c

‍

The World Wide Web was created as a portal for communication, to connect people from far away, and while it started with electronic mail, mail moved to instant messaging, which let people have conversations and interact with each other from afar in real-time. But now, the new paradigm is the Internet of Things and how machines can communicate with one another. Now one can use a wearable gadget that can unlock the front door upon arrival at home and can message the air conditioner so that it switches on. This is IoT.

WHAT EXACTLY IS IoT?

The term ‘Internet of Things’ was coined in 1999 by Kevin Ashton, a computer scientist who put Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chips on products in order to track them in the supply chain, while he worked at Proctor & Gamble (P&G). And after the launch of the iPhone in 2007, there were already more connected devices than people on the planet.

Fast forward to today and we live in a more connected world than ever. So much so that even our handheld devices and household appliances can now connect and communicate through a vast network that has been built so that data can be transferred and received between devices. There are currently more IoT devices than users in the world and according to the WEF’s report on State of the Connected World, by 2025 there will be more than 40 billion such devices that will record data so it can be analyzed.

IoT finds use in many parts of our lives. It has helped businesses streamline their operations, reduce costs, and improve productivity. IoT also helped during the Covid-19 pandemic, with devices that could help with contact tracing and wearables that could be used for health monitoring. All of these devices are able to gather, store and share data so that it can be analyzed. The information is gathered according to rules set by the people who build these systems.

APPLICATION OF IoT

IoT is used by both consumers and the industry.

Some of the widely used examples of CIoT (Consumer IoT) are wearables like health and fitness trackers, smart rings with near-field communication (NFC), and smartwatches. Smartwatches gather a lot of personal data. Smart clothing, with sensors on it, can monitor the wearer’s vital signs. There are even smart jewelry, which can monitor sleeping patterns and also stress levels.

With the advent of virtual and augmented reality, the gaming industry can now make the experience even more immersive and engrossing. Smart glasses and headsets are used, along with armbands fitted with sensors that can detect the movement of arms and replicate the movement in the game.

At home, there are smart TVs, security cameras, smart bulbs, home control devices, and other IoT-enabled ‘smart’ appliances like coffee makers, that can be turned on through an app, or at a particular time in the morning so that it acts as an alarm. There are also voice-command assistants like Alexa and Siri, and these work with software written by manufacturers that can understand simple instructions.

Industrial IoT (IIoT) mainly uses connected machines for the purposes of synchronization, efficiency, and cost-cutting. For example, smart factories gather and analyze data as the work is being done. Sensors are also used in agriculture to check soil moisture levels, and these then automatically run the irrigation system without the need for human intervention.

Statistics

• The IoT device market is poised to reach $1.4 trillion by 2027, according to Fortune Business Insight.
• The number of cellular IoT connections is expected to reach 3.5 billion by 2023. (Forbes)
• The amount of data generated by IoT devices is expected to reach 73.1 ZB (zettabytes) by 2025.
• 94% of retailers agree that the benefits of implementing IoT outweigh the risk.
• 55% of companies believe that 3^rd party IoT providers should have to comply with IoT security and privacy regulations.
• 53% of all users acknowledge that wearable devices will be vulnerable to data breaches, viruses,
• Companies could invest up to 15 trillion dollars in IoT by 2025 (Gigabit)

CONCERNS AND SOLUTIONS

• Two of the biggest concerns with IoT devices are the privacy of users and the devices being secure in order to prevent attacks by bad actors. This makes knowledge of how these things work absolutely imperative.
• It is worth noting that these devices all work with a central hub, like a smartphone. This means that it pairs with the smartphone through an app and acts as a gateway, which could compromise the smartphone as well if a hacker were to target that IoT device.
• With technology like smart television sets that have cameras and microphones, the major concern is that hackers could hack and take over the functioning of the television as these are not adequately secured by the manufacturer.
• A hacker could control the camera and cyberstalk the victim, and therefore it is very important to become familiar with the features of a device and ensure that it is well protected from any unauthorized usage. Even simple things, like keeping the camera covered when it is not being used.
• There is also the concern that since IoT devices gather and share data without human intervention, they could be transmitting data that the user does not want to share. This is true of health trackers. Users who wear heart and blood pressure monitors have their data sent to the insurance company, who may then decide to raise the premium on their life insurance based on the data they get.
• IoT devices often keep functioning as normal even if they have been compromised. Most devices do not log an attack or alert the user, and changes like higher power or bandwidth usage go unnoticed after the attack. It is therefore very important to make sure the device is properly protected.
• It is also important to keep the software of the device updated as vulnerabilities are found in the code and fixes are provided by the manufacturer. Some IoT devices, however, lack the capability to be patched and are therefore permanently ‘at risk’.

CONCLUSION

Humanity inhabits this world that is made up of all these nodes that talk to each other and get things done. Users can harmonize their devices so that everything runs like a tandem bike – completely in sync with all other parts. But while we make use of all the benefits, it is also very important that one understands what they are using, how it is functioning, and how one can tackle issues should they come up. This is also important to understand because once people get used to IoT, it will be that much more difficult to give up the comfort and ease that these systems provide, and therefore it would make more sense to be prepared for any eventuality. A lot of times, good and sensible usage alone can keep devices safe and services intact. But users should be aware of any issues because forewarned is forearmed.