#FactCheck - Viral Video of Aircraft Carrier Destroyed in Sea Storm Is AI-Generated

Introduction

India's broadcasting sector has undergone significant changes in recent years with technological advancements such as the introduction of new platforms like Direct-to-Home (DTH), Internet Protocol television (IPTV), Over-The-Top (OTT), and integrated models. Platform changes, emerging technologies and advancements in the advertising space have all necessitated the need for new governing laws that take these developments into account. 

The Union Government and concerned ministry have realised there is a pressing need to develop a robust regulatory framework for the Indian broadcasting sector in the country and consequently, a draft Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2023, was released in November 2023 and the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) had invited feedback and comments from different stakeholders. The draft Bill aims to establish a unified framework for regulating broadcasting services in the country, replacing the current Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 and other policy guidelines governing broadcasting.

Recently a new draft of an updated ‘Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2024,’ was shared with selected broadcasters, associations, streaming services, and tech firms, each marked with their identifier to prevent leaks. 

Key Highlights of the Updated Broadcasting Bill 

As per the recent draft of the Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2024, social media accounts could be identified as ‘Digital News Broadcasters’ and can be classified within the ambit of the regulation. Some of the major aspects of the new bill were first reported by Hindustan Times. 

The new draft of the Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2024, proposes that individuals who regularly upload videos to social media, make podcasts, or write about current affairs online could be classified as Digital News Broadcasters. This entails that YouTubers and Instagrammers who receive a share of advertising revenue or monetize their social media presence through affiliate activities will be regulated as Digital News Broadcasters. This includes channels, podcasts, and blogs that cover news and utilise Google AdSense. They must comply with a Programme Code and Advertising Code.

Online content creators who do not provide news or current affairs but provide programming and curated programs beyond a certain threshold will be treated as OTT broadcasters in case they provide content licensed or live through a website or social media platform.

The new version also introduces new obligations for intermediaries and social media intermediaries related to streaming services and digital news broadcasters, and, in contrast to the last version circulated in 2023, the latest also carries provisions targeting online advertising. In the context of streaming services, OTT broadcasting services are no longer a part of the definition of "internet broadcasting services." The definition of OTT broadcasting service has also been revised, allowing content creators who regularly upload their content to social media to be considered as OTT broadcasting services.

The new definition of an 'intermediary' includes social media intermediaries, advertisement intermediaries, internet service providers, online search engines, and online marketplaces. 

The new Bill allows the government to prescribe different due diligence guidelines for social media platforms and online advertisement intermediaries and requires all intermediaries to provide appropriate information, including information pertaining to the OTT broadcasters and Digital News Broadcasters on their platform, to the central government to ensure compliance with the act. This entails the liability provisions for social media intermediaries which do not provide information “pertaining to OTT Broadcasters and Digital News Broadcasters” on its platforms for compliance. This suggests that when information is sought about a YouTube, Instagram or X/Twitter user, the platform will need to provide this information to the Indian government.

A new draft bill contains specific provisions governing ‘Online Advertising’ and to do so it creates the category of 'advertising intermediaries'. These intermediaries enable the buying or selling of advertisement space on the internet or placing advertisements on online platforms without endorsing the advertisement. 

Final Words

The Indian Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) is making efforts to propose robust regulatory changes to the country's new-age broadcast sector, which would cover the specific provisions for Digital News Broadcasters, OTT Broadcasters and Intermediaries. The proposed bill defining the scope and obligation of each. 

However, these changes will have significant implications for press and creative freedom. The changes in the new version of the updated bill from its previous draft expanded the applicability of the bill to a larger number of key actors, this move brought ‘content creators’ under the definition of OTT or digital news broadcasters, which raises concerns about overly rigid provisions and might face criticism from media representative perspectives. 

According to recent media reports, the Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2024 version has been withdrawn by the I&B ministry facing criticism from relevant stakeholders.

The ministry must take due consideration and feedback from concerned stakeholders and place reliance on balancing individual rights while promoting a healthy regulated landscape considering the needs of the new-age broadcasting sector.

References:

1. https://www.medianama.com/2024/07/223-india-broadcast-bill-online-creators/#:~:text=Online%20content%20creators%20that%20do,or%20a%20social%20media%20platform.
2. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/new-draft-of-broadcasting-bill-news-influencers-may-be-classified-as-broadcasters-101721961764666.html
3. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/broadcasting-bill-still-in-drafting-stage-mib-tells-rs-101722058753083.html
4. https://www.newslaundry.com/2024/07/29/indias-new-broadcast-bill-now-has-compliance-requirements-for-youtubers-and-instagrammers
5. https://m.thewire.in/article/media/social-media-videos-text-digital-news-broadcasting-bill
6. https://mib.gov.in/sites/default/files/Public%20Notice_07.12.2023.pdf
7. https://news.abplive.com/news/india/centre-withdraws-draft-of-broadcasting-services-regulation-bill-1709770

‍

Introduction

Misinformation spreads differently with respect to different host environments, making localised cultural narratives and practices major factors in how an individual deals with it when presented in a certain place and to a certain group. In the digital age, with time-sensitive data, an overload of information creates a lot of noise which makes it harder to make informed decisions. There are also cases where customary beliefs, biases, and cultural narratives are presented in ways that are untrue. These instances often include misinformation related to health and superstitions, historical distortions, and natural disasters and myths. Such narratives, when shared on social media, can lead to widespread misconceptions and even harmful behaviours. For example, it may also include misinformation that goes against scientific consensus or misinformation that contradicts simple, objectively true facts. In such ambiguous situations, there is a higher probability of people falling back on patterns in determining what information is right or wrong. Here, cultural narratives and cognitive biases come into play.

Misinformation and Cultural Narratives

Cultural narratives include deep-seated cultural beliefs, folklore, and national myths. These narratives can also be used to manipulate public opinion as political and social groups often leverage them to proceed with their agenda. Lack of digital literacy and increasing information online along with social media platforms and their focus on generating algorithms for engagement aids this process. The consequences can even prove to be fatal.

During COVID-19, false claims targeted certain groups as being virus spreaders fueled stigmatisation and eroded trust. Similarly, vaccine misinformation, rooted in cultural fears, spurred hesitancy and outbreaks. Beyond health, manipulated narratives about parts of history are spread depending on the sentiments of the people. These instances exploit emotional and cultural sensitivities, emphasizing the urgent need for media literacy and awareness to counter their harmful effects.

CyberPeace Recommendations

As cultural narratives may lead to knowingly or unknowingly spreading misinformation on social media platforms, netizens must consider preventive measures that can help them build resilience against any biased misinformation they may encounter. The social media platforms must also develop strategies to counter such types of misinformation.

• Digital and Information Literacy: Netizens must encourage developing digital and information literacy in a time of information overload on social media platforms. 
• The Role Of Media: The media outlets can play an active role, by strictly providing fact-based information and not feeding into narratives to garner eyeballs. Social media platforms also need to be careful while creating algorithms focused on consistent engagement.
• Community Fact-Checking: As localised information prevails in such cases, owing to the time-sensitive nature, immediate debunking of precarious information by authorities at the ground level is encouraged.
• Scientifically Correct Information: Starting early and addressing myths and biases through factual and scientifically correct information is also encouraged. 

Conclusion

Cultural narratives are an ingrained part of society, and they might affect how misinformation spreads and what we end up believing. Acknowledging this process and taking counter measures will allow us to move further and take steps for intervention regarding tackling the spread of misinformation specifically aided by cultural narratives. Efforts to raise awareness and educate the public to seek sound information, practice verification checks, and visit official channels are of the utmost importance.

References

• https://www.icf.com/insights/cybersecurity/developing-effective-responses-to-fake-new
• https://www.dw.com/en/india-fake-news-problem-fueled-by-digital-illiteracy/a-56746776
• https://www.apa.org/topics/journalism-facts/how-why-misinformation-spreads

‍

Introduction

The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology recently released the IT Intermediary Guidelines 2023 Amendment for social media and online gaming. The notification is crucial when the Digital India Bill’s drafting is underway. There is no denying that this bill, part of a series of bills focused on amendments and adding new provisions, will significantly improve the dynamics of Cyberspace in India in terms of reporting, grievance redressal, accountability and protection of digital rights and duties.

What is the Amendment?

The amendment comes as a key feature of cyberspace as the bill introduces fact-checking, a crucial aspect of relating information on various platforms prevailing in cyberspace. Misformation and disinformation were seen rising significantly during the Covid-19 pandemic, and fact-checking was more important than ever. This has been taken into consideration by the policymakers and hence has been incorporated as part of the Intermediary guidelines. The key features of the guidelines are as follows –

• The phrase “online game,” which is now defined as “a game that is offered on the Internet and is accessible by a user through a computer resource or an intermediary,” has been added.
• A clause has been added that emphasises that if an online game poses a risk of harm to the user, intermediaries and complaint-handling systems must advise the user not to host, display, upload, modify, publish, transmit, store, update, or share any data related to that risky online game.
• A proviso to Rule 3(1)(f) has been added, which states that if an online gaming intermediary has provided users access to any legal online real money game, it must promptly notify its users of the change, within 24 hours.
• Sub-rules have been added to Rule 4 that focus on any legal online real money game and require large social media intermediaries to exercise further due diligence. In certain situations, online gaming intermediaries:

• Are required to display a demonstrable and obvious mark of verification of such online game by an online gaming self-regulatory organisation on such permitted online real money game
• Will not offer to finance themselves or allow financing to be provided by a third party.
• Verification of real money online gaming has been added to Rule 4-A.

• The Ministry may name as many self-regulatory organisations for online gaming as it deems necessary for confirming an online real-money game.
• Each online gaming self-regulatory body will prominently publish on its website/mobile application the procedure for filing complaints and the appropriate contact information.
• After reviewing an application, the self-regulatory authority may declare a real money online game to be a legal game if it is satisfied that:

• There is no wagering on the outcome of the game.
• Complies with the regulations governing the legal age at which a person can engage into a contract.
• The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 have a new rule 4-B (Applicability of certain obligations after an initial period) that states that the obligations of the rule under rules 3 and 4 will only apply to online games after a three-month period has passed.
• According to Rule 4-C (Obligations in Relation to Online Games Other Than Online Real Money Games), the Central Government may direct the intermediary to make necessary modifications without affecting the main idea if it deems it necessary in the interest of India’s sovereignty and integrity, the security of the State, or friendship with foreign States.
• Intermediaries, such as social media companies or internet service providers, will have to take action against such content identified by this unit or risk losing their “safe harbour” protections under Section 79 of the IT Act, which let intermediaries escape liability for what third parties post on their websites. This is problematic and unacceptable. Additionally, these notified revisions can circumvent the takedown order process described in Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000. They also violated the ruling in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), which established precise rules for content banning.
• The government cannot decide if any material is “fake” or “false” without a right of appeal or the ability for judicial monitoring since the power to do so could be abused to thwart examination or investigation by media groups. Government takedown orders have been issued for critical remarks or opinions posted on social media sites; most of the platforms have to abide by them, and just a few, like Twitter, have challenged them in court.

Conclusion

The new rules briefly cover the aspects of fact-checking, content takedown by Govt, and the relevance and scope of sections 69A and 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Hence, it is pertinent that the intermediaries maintain compliance with rules to ensure that the regulations are sustainable and efficient for the future. Despite these rules, the responsibility of the netizens cannot be neglected, and hence active civic participation coupled with such efficient regulations will go a long way in safeguarding the Indian cyber ecosystem.