#FactCheck – Debunked: Dhoni's Viral Picture Misinterpreted as Political Support

INTRODUCTION:

The Ministry of Defence has recently designated the Additional Directorate General of Strategic Communication in the Indian Army as the nodal officer now authorised to send removal requests and notices to social media intermediaries regarding posts consisting of illegal content with respect to the Army. Earlier, this process was followed through the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY). The recent designation gives the Army the autonomy of circumnavigating the old process and enables them to send direct notices (as deemed appropriate by the government and its agency). Let us look at the legal framework that allows them to do so and its policy implications. 

BACKGROUND AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK:

Section 69 of the IT Act 2000 gives the government the power to issue directions for interception, monitoring or decryption of any data/information through any computer resource. This is done so under six reasons related to:

• Upholding the sovereignty or integrity of India
• Security of the state
• Defence of India
• Friendly relations with foreign states
• Public order or for preventing incitement of any cognisable offence
• Investigations of offences related to the aforementioned reasons 

Section 79(3)(b) of the Information Technology Act 2000 is another aspect of the law related to the removal of data on notification. It allows for all intermediaries (including internet service providers and social media platforms) to have safety harbours from the liability of the content put out by third parties/users on their platforms. This, however, is only applicable when the intermediary has either received a notification or actual knowledge by the appropriate government or its agency of the data on their platform being used for unlawful acts and complies promptly by removing the data from their platform without tampering with evidence.

PLAUSIBLE REASONS FOR POLICY DECISION:

Cases related to the Indian Army are sensitive for a number of reasons, rooted in the fact that they directly pertain to the nation's security, integrity and sovereignty. The impact of the spread of misinformation and disinformation is almost instantaneous and the stakes are high in any circumstance, but exceptionally so when it comes to the Armed Forces and the nation’s security status. A mechanism to tackle cases of such a security level should allow for quick action from the authorities. Owing to the change in the ability to notify directly rather than through another ministry, the army can now promptly deal with these concerns as and when they arise. One immediate benefit of this change is that the forces can now quickly respond to instances where foreign states and actors with malicious intent put out information that can cause harm to the nation’s interests, image and integrity. 

This step helps the forces deal with countering misinformation, ensuring national security and even addressing issues of online propaganda. An example of sensitive content about the army leading to legal intervention is the case of Delhi-based magazine The Caravan. The Defence Ministry, along with the Intelligence Bureau and the Jammu and Kashmir police ordered the Delhi-based publication to remove an article claiming the murder and torture of civilians by the Indian army in Jammu and Kashmir citing the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. The instruction was challenged by the magazine in the courts.

CONCLUSION:

This move brings with it potential benefits along with risks and the focus should always be on maintaining a balanced approach. Transparency and accountability are imperative and checks on related guidelines so as to prevent misuse while simultaneously protecting national security should be at the centre of the objective of the policy approach. Misinformation in and about the armed forces must be dealt with immediately.

REFERENCES:

• https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/army-can-now-directly-issue-notices-to-remove-online-posts-101730313177838.html
• https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/inside-79-3-b-the-content-blocking-provision-with-many-legal-grey-areas-101706987924882.html
• https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/govt-orders-magazine-to-take-down-article-on-army-torture-and-murder-in-jammu/article67840790.ece
• https://myind.net/Home/viewArticle/army-gains-authority-to-directly-issue-notice-to-take-down-online-posts

‍

Introduction

Assisted Reproductive Technology (“ART”) refers to a diverse set of medical procedures designed to aid individuals or couples in achieving pregnancy when conventional methods are unsuccessful. This umbrella term encompasses various fertility treatments, including in vitro fertilization (IVF), intrauterine insemination (IUI), and gamete and embryo manipulation. ART procedures involve the manipulation of both male and female reproductive components to facilitate conception.

The dynamic landscape of data flows within the healthcare sector, notably in the realm of ART, demands a nuanced understanding of the complex interplay between privacy regulations and medical practices. In this context, the Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices And Procedures And Sensitive Personal Data Or Information) Rules, 2011, play a pivotal role, designating health information as "sensitive personal data or information" and underscoring the importance of safeguarding individuals' privacy. This sensitivity is particularly pronounced in the ART sector, where an array of personal data, ranging from medical records to genetic information, is collected and processed. The recent Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021, in conjunction with the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, establishes a framework for the regulation of ART clinics and banks, presenting a layered approach to data protection.

A note on data generated by ART

Data flows in any sector are scarcely uniform and often not easily classified under straight-jacket categories. Consequently, mapping and identifying data and its types become pivotal. It is believed that most data flows in the healthcare sector are highly sensitive and personal in nature, which may severely compromise the privacy and safety of an individual if breached. The Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices And Procedures And Sensitive Personal Data Or Information) Rules, 2011 (“SPDI Rules”) categorizes any information pertaining to physical, physiological, mental conditions or medical records and history as “sensitive personal data or information”; this definition is broad enough to encompass any data collected by any ART facility or equipment. These include any information collected during the screening of patients, pertaining to ovulation and menstrual cycles, follicle and sperm count, ultrasound results, blood work etc. It also includes pre-implantation genetic testing on embryos to detect any genetic abnormality. 

But data flows extend beyond mere medical procedures and technology. Health data also involves any medical procedures undertaken, the amount of medicine and drugs administered during any procedure, its resultant side effects, recovery etc. Any processing of the above-mentioned information, in turn, may generate more personal data points relating to an individual’s political affiliations, race, ethnicity, genetic data such as biometrics and DNA etc.; It is seen that different ethnicities and races react differently to the same/similar medication and have different propensities to genetic diseases. Further, it is to be noted that data is not only collected by professionals but also by intelligent equipment like AI which may be employed by any facility to render their service. Additionally, dissemination of information under exceptional circumstances (e.g. medical emergency) also affects how data may be classified. Considerations are further nuanced when the fundamental right to identity of a child conceived and born via ART may be in conflict with the fundamental right to privacy of a donor to remain anonymous. 

Intersection of Privacy laws and ART laws: 

In India, ART technology is regulated by the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021 (“ART Act”). With this, the Union aims to regulate and supervise assisted reproductive technology clinics and ART banks, prevent misuse and ensure safe and ethical practice of assisted reproductive technology services. When read with the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (“DPDP Act”) and other ancillary guidelines, the two legislations provide some framework regulations for the digital privacy of health-based apps.

The ART Act establishes a National Assisted Reproductive Technology and Surrogacy Registry (“National Registry”) which acts as a central database for all clinics and banks and their nature of services. The Act also establishes a National Assisted Reproductive Technology and Surrogacy Board (“National Board”)  under the Surrogacy Act to monitor the implementation of the act and advise the central government on policy matters. It also supervises the functioning of the National Registry, liaises with State Boards and curates a code of conduct for professionals working in ART clinics and banks. Under the DPDP Act, these bodies (i.e. National Board, State Board, ART clinics and banks) are most likely classified as data fiduciaries (primarily clinics and banks), data processors (these may include National Board and State boards) or an amalgamation of both (these include any appropriate authority established under the ART Act for investigation of complaints, suspend or cancellation of registration of clinics etc.) depending on the nature of work undertaken by them. If so classified, then the duties and liabilities of data fiduciaries and processors would necessarily apply to these bodies. As a result, all bodies would necessarily have to adopt Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PETs) and other organizational measures to ensure compliance with privacy laws in place. This may be considered one of the most critical considerations of any ART facility since any data collected by them would be sensitive personal data pertaining to health, regulated by the Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices And Procedures And Sensitive Personal Data Or Information) Rules, 2011 (“SPDI Rules 2011”). These rules provide for how sensitive personal data or information are to be collected, handled and processed by anyone.

The ART Act independently also provides for the duties of ART clinics and banks in the country. ART clinics and banks are required to inform the commissioning couple/woman of all procedures undertaken and all costs, risks, advantages, and side effects of their selected procedure. It mandatorily ensures that all information collected by such clinics and banks to not informed to anyone except the database established by the National Registry or in cases of medical emergency or on order of court. Data collected by clinics and banks (these include details on donor oocytes, sperm or embryos used or unused) are required to be detailed and must be submitted to the National Registry online. ART banks are also required to collect personal information of donors including name, Aadhar number, address and any other details. By mandating online submission, the ART Act is harmonized with the DPDP Act, which regulates all digital personal data and emphasises free, informed consent.

Conclusion

With the increase in active opt-ins for ART, data privacy becomes a vital consideration for all healthcare facilities and professionals. Safeguard measures are not only required on a corporate level but also on a governmental level. It is to be noted that in the 262 Session of the Rajya Sabha, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology reported 165 data breach incidents involving citizen data from January 2018 to October 2023 from the Central Identities Data Repository despite publicly denying. This discovery puts into question the safety and integrity of data that may be submitted to the National Registry database, especially given the type of data (both personal and sensitive information) it aims to collate. At present the ART Act is well supported by the DPDP Act. However, further judicial and legislative deliberations are required to effectively regulate and balance the interests of all stakeholders.

References

• The Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices And Procedures And Sensitive Personal Data Or Information) Rules, 2011
• Caring for Intimate Data in Fertility Technologies https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3411764.3445132 
• Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023
• https://www.wolterskluwer.com/en/expert-insights/pharmacogenomics-and-race-can-heritage-affect-drug-disposition  

In 2023, PIB reported that up to 22% of young women in India are affected by Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS). However, access to reliable information regarding the condition and its treatment remains a challenge. A study by the PGIMER Chandigarh conducted in 2021 revealed that approximately 37% of affected women rely on the internet as their primary source of information for PCOS. However, it can be difficult to distinguish credible medical advice from misleading or inaccurate information online since the internet and social media are rife with misinformation. The uptake of misinformation can significantly delay the diagnosis and treatment of medical conditions, jeopardizing health outcomes for all.

The PCOS Misinformation Ecosystem Online

PCOS is one of the most common disorders diagnosed in the female endocrine system, characterized by the swelling of ovaries and the formation of small cysts on their outer edges. This may lead to irregular menstruation, weight gain, hirsutism, possible infertility, poor mental health, and other symptoms. However, there is limited research on its causes, leaving most medical practitioners in India ill-equipped to manage the issue effectively and pushing women to seek alternate remedies from various sources.

This creates space for the proliferation of rumours, unverified cures and superstitions,  on social media, For example, content on YouTube, Facebook, and Instagram may promote “miracle cures” like detox teas or restrictive diets, or viral myths claiming PCOS can be “cured” through extreme weight loss or herbal remedies. Such misinformation not only creates false hope for women but also delays treatment, or may worsen symptoms.

 How Tech Platforms Amplify Misinformation 

1. Engagement vs. Accuracy: Social media algorithms are designed to reward viral content, even if it’s misleading or incendiary since it generates advertisement revenue. Further, non-medical health influencers often dominate health conversations online and offer advice with promises of curing the condition.
2. Lack of Verification: Although platforms like YouTube try to provide verified health-related videos through content shelves, and label unverified content, the sheer volume of content online means that a significant chunk of content escapes the net of content moderation. 
3. Cultural Context: In India, discussions around women’s health, especially reproductive health, are stigmatized, making social media the go-to source for private, albeit unreliable, information. 

Way Forward

a. Regulating Health Content on Tech Platforms: Social media is a significant source of health information to millions who may otherwise lack access to affordable healthcare. Rather than rolling back content moderation practices as seen recently, platforms must dedicate more resources to identify and debunk misinformation, particularly health misinformation. 

b. Public Awareness Campaigns: Governments and NGOs should run nationwide campaigns in digital literacy to educate on women’s health issues in vernacular languages and utilize online platforms for culturally sensitive messaging to reach rural and semi-urban populations. This is vital for countering the stigma and lack of awareness which enables misinformation to proliferate. 

c. Empowering Healthcare Communication: Several studies suggest a widespread dissatisfaction among women in many parts of the world regarding the information and care they receive for PCOS.  This is what drives them to social media for answers. Training PCOS specialists and healthcare workers to provide accurate details and counter misinformation during patient consultations can improve the communication gaps between healthcare professionals and patients. 

d. Strengthening the Research for PCOS: The allocation of funding for research in PCOS is vital, especially in the face of its growing prevalence amongst Indian women. Academic and healthcare institutions must collaborate to produce culturally relevant, evidence-based interventions for PCOS. Information regarding this must be made available online since the internet is most often a primary source of information. An improvement in the research will inform improved communication, which will help reduce the trust deficit between women and healthcare professionals when it comes to women’s health concerns.

Conclusion 

In India, the PCOS misinformation ecosystem is shaped by a mix of local and global factors such as health communication failures, cultural stigma, and tech platform design prioritizing engagement over accuracy. With millions of women turning to the internet for guidance regarding their conditions, they are increasingly vulnerable to unverified claims and pseudoscientific remedies which can lead to delayed diagnoses, ineffective treatments, and worsened health outcomes. The rising number of PCOS cases in the country warrants the bridging of health research and communications gaps so that women can be empowered with accurate, actionable information to make the best decisions regarding their health and well-being. 

Sources

• https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1893279#:~:text=It%20is%20the%20most%20prevailing%20female%20endocrine,neuroendocrine%20system%2C%20sedentary%20lifestyle%2C%20diet%2C%20and%20obesity. 
• https://www.thinkglobalhealth.org/article/india-unprepared-pcos-crisis?utm_source=chatgpt.com 
• https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckgz2p0999yo ‍
• https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9092874/