#FactCheck - "AI-Generated Image of UK Police Officers Bowing to Muslims Goes Viral”

AI-generated content has been taking up space in the ever-changing dynamics of today's tech landscape. Generative AI has emerged as a powerful tool that has enabled the creation of hyper-realistic audio, video, and images. While advantageous, this ability has some downsides, too, particularly in content authenticity and manipulation. 

The impact of this content is varied in the areas of ethical, psychological and social harms seen in the past couple of years. A major concern is the creation of non-consensual explicit content, including nudes. This content includes content where an individual’s face gets superimposed onto explicit images or videos without their consent. This is not just a violation of privacy for individuals, and can have humongous consequences for their professional and personal lives. This blog examines the existing laws and whether they are equipped to deal with the challenges that this content poses. 

Understanding the Deepfake Technology

Deepfake technology is a media file (image, video, or speech) that typically represents a human subject that is altered deceptively using deep neural networks (DNNs). It is used to alter a person’s identity, and it usually takes the form of a “face swap” where the identity of a source subject is transferred onto a destination subject. The destination’s facial expressions and head movements remain the same, but the appearance in the video is that of the source. In the case of videos, the identities can be substituted by way of replacement or reenactment.

This superimposed content creates realistic content, such as fake nudes. Presently, creating a deepfake is not a costly endeavour. It requires a Graphics Processing Unit (GPU), software that is free, open-source, and easy to download, and graphics editing and audio-dubbing skills.  Some of the common apps to create deepfakes are DeepFaceLab and FaceSwap, which are both public and open source and are supported by thousands of users who actively participate in the evolution and development of these software and models. 

Legal Gaps and Challenges

Multiple gaps and challenges exist in the legal space for deepfakes and their regulation. They are:

1. The inadequate definitions governing AI-generated explicit content often lead to enforcement challenges.
2. Jurisdictional challenges due to the cross-border nature of crimes and the difficulties caused by international cooperation measures are in the early stages for AI content. 
3. There is a gap between the current consent-based and harassment laws for AI-generated nudes. 
4. Providing evidence or providing proof for the intent and identification of perpetrators in digital crimes is a challenge that is yet to be overcome. 

Policy Responses and Global Trends 

Presently, the global response to deepfakes is developing. The UK has developed the Online Safety Bill, the EU has the AI Act, the US has some federal laws such as the National AI Initiative Act of 2020 and India is currently developing the India AI Act as the specific legislation dealing with AI and its correlating issues. 

The IT Rules, 2021, and the DPDP Act, 2023, regulate digital platforms by mandating content governance, privacy policies, grievance redressal, and compliance with removal orders. Emphasising intermediary liability and safe harbour protections, these laws play a crucial role in tackling harmful content like AI-generated nudes, while the DPDP Act focuses on safeguarding privacy and personal data rights.

Bridging the Gap: CyberPeace Recommendations 

1. Initiate legislative reforms by advocating for clear and precise definitions for the consent frameworks and instituting high penalties for AI-based offences, particularly those which are aimed at sexually explicit material.
2. Advocate for global cooperation and collaborations by setting up international standards and bilateral and multilateral treaties that address the cross-border nature of these offences.
3. Platforms should push for accountability by pushing for stricter platform responsibility for the detection and removal of harmful AI-generated content. Platforms should introduce strong screening mechanisms to counter the huge influx of harmful content.  
4. Public campaigns which spread awareness and educate users about their rights and the resources available to them in case such an act takes place with them. 

Conclusion 

The rapid advancement of AI-generated explicit content demands immediate and decisive action. As this technology evolves, the gaps in existing legal frameworks become increasingly apparent, leaving individuals vulnerable to profound privacy violations and societal harm. Addressing this challenge requires adaptive, forward-thinking legislation that prioritises individual safety while fostering technological progress. Collaborative policymaking is essential and requires uniting governments, tech platforms, and civil society to develop globally harmonised standards. By striking a balance between innovation and societal well-being, we can ensure that the digital age is not only transformative but also secure and respectful of human dignity. Let’s act now to create a safer future!

References

• https://etedge-insights.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/deepfakes-and-the-future-of-digital-security-are-we-ready/
• https://odsc.medium.com/the-rise-of-deepfakes-understanding-the-challenges-and-opportunities-7724efb0d981 ‍
• https://insights.sei.cmu.edu/blog/how-easy-is-it-to-make-and-detect-a-deepfake/

Introduction

In 2019 India got its bill on Data protection in the form of the Personal Data Protection Bill 2019. This bill focused on digital rights and duties pertaining to data privacy. However, the bill was scrapped by the Govt in mid-2022, and a new bill was drafted, Successor bill was introduced as the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, 2022 on 18th November 2022, which was made open for public comments and consultations and now the bill is expected to be tabled at the parliament in the Monsoon session.

What is DPDP, 2022?

Digital Personal Data Protection Bill, is the lasted draft regulation for data privacy in India. The bill has been essentially focused towards data protection by companies and the keep aspect of Puttaswamy judgement of data privacy as a fundamental right has been upheld under the scope of the bill. The bill comes after nearly 150 recommendations which the parliamentary committee made when the PDP, 2019 was scrapped.

The bill highlights the following keen aspects-

• Data Fiduciary- The entity (an individual, company, firm, state, etc.) which decides the purpose and means of processing an individual’s personal data.
• Data Principle- The individual to whom personal data is related.
• Processing- The entire cycle of operations that can be carried out concerning personal data.
• Gender Neutrality- For the first time in India’s legislative history, “her” and “she” have been used to refer to individuals irrespective of gender.
• Right to Erase Data- Data principals will have the right to demand the erasure and correction of data collected by the data fiduciary.
• Cross-border data transfer- The bill allows cross-border data after an assessment of relevant factors by the Central Government.
• Children’s Rights- The bill guarantees the right to digital privacy under the protection of parents/guardians.
• Heavy Penalties- The bill enforces heavy penalties for non-compliance with the provisions, not exceeding Rs 500 crore.

Data Protection Board

The bill lays down provisions for setting up a Data Protection Board. This board will be an independent body acting solely on the factors of data privacy and protection of the data principles and maintaining compliance by data fiduciaries. The board will be headed by a chairperson of essential and relevant qualifications, and members and various other officials shall assist him/her under the board. The board will serve grievance redressal to the data principles and can conduct investigation, inquiry, proceeding, and pass orders equivalent to a Civil court. The proceeding will be undertaken on the principle of natural justice, and the aggrieved can file an appeal to the High Court of appropriate jurisdiction.

Global Comparison

Many countries have data protection laws that regulate the processing of personal data. Some of the notable examples include:

• European Union: The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is one of the world’s most comprehensive data protection laws. It regulates public and private entities’ processing of personal data and gives individuals a wide range of rights over their personal data.
• United States: The US has several data protection laws that apply to specific sectors or types of data, such as health data (HIPAA) or financial data (Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act). However, there is no comprehensive federal data protection law in the US.
• Japan: Japan’s Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA) regulates the handling of personal data by private entities and gives individuals certain rights over their personal data.
• Australia: Australia’s Privacy Act 1988 regulates the handling of personal data by public and private entities and gives individuals certain rights over their personal data.
• Brazil: Brazil’s General Data Protection Law (LGPD) regulates the processing of personal data by public and private entities and gives individuals certain rights over their personal data. It also imposes heavy fines and penalties on entities that violate the provisions of the law.

Overall, while there are some similarities in data protection laws across countries, there are also significant differences in scope, applicability, and enforcement. It is important for organisations to understand the data protection laws that apply to their operations and take appropriate steps to comply with these laws.

Parliamentary Asscent

The case of violation of the privacy policy by WhatsApp at the Hon’ble Supreme Court resulted in a significant advocacy for Data privacy as a fundamental right, and it was held that, as suggested otherwise in the privacy policy, Whatsapp was sharing its user’s data with Meta. This massive breach of trust could have led to data mismanagement affecting thousands of Indian users. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has taken due consideration of data privacy and its challenges in India and asked the Govt to table the bill in Parliament. The bill will be tabled for discussion in the monsoon session. The Supreme Court has set up a constitutional bench to check the bill’s scope, extent and applications and provide its judicial oversight.  The constitution bench of Justices KM Joseph, Ajay Rastogi, Aniruddha Bose, Hrishikesh Roy and CT Ravikumar has fixed the matter for hearing in August in order to enforce the potential changes and amendments in the act post the parliamentary discussion.

Conclusion

India is the world’s largest democracy, so the crucial aspects of passing laws and amendments have always been followed by the government and kept under check by the judiciary. The discussion over bills is a crucial part of the democratic process, and bills as important as Digital Personal Data Protection need to be discussed and analysed thoroughly in both houses of Parliament to ensure the govt passes a sustainable and efficient law.

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

‍