#FactCheck -AI-Generated Video Falsely Shows Cristiano Ronaldo Chanting “Free Palestine

Executive Summary

A dispute had recently emerged in Kotdwar, Uttarakhand, over the name of a shop. During the controversy, a local youth, Deepak Kumar, came forward in support of the shopkeeper. The incident subsequently became a subject of discussion on social media, with users expressing varied reactions. Meanwhile, a photo began circulating on social media showing a burqa-clad woman presenting a bouquet to Deepak Kumar. The image is being shared with the claim that All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM)’s women’s president, Rubina, welcomed “Mohammad Deepak Kumar” by presenting him with a bouquet. However, research conducted by the CyberPeace found the viral claim to be false. The research  revealed that users are sharing an AI-generated image with a misleading claim.

‍

Claim:

‍

On social media platform Instagram, a user shared the viral image claiming that AIMIM’s women’s president Rubina welcomed “Mohammad Deepak Kumar” by presenting him with a bouquet. The link to the post, its archived version, and a screenshot are provided below.

• https://www.instagram.com/p/DUYXj1gCPYZ/ 
• https://archive.ph/92akN 

‍

‍

‍

Fact Check:

Upon closely examining the viral image, certain inconsistencies raised suspicion that it could be AI-generated. To verify its authenticity, the image was analysed using the AI detection tool Hive Moderation, which indicated a 96 percent probability that the image was AI-generated.

‍

‍

In the next stage of the research , the image was also analysed using another AI detection tool, Wasit AI, which likewise identified the image as AI-generated.

‍

‍

Conclusion

‍

The research  establishes that users are circulating an AI-generated image with a misleading claim linking it to the Kotdwar controversy.

‍

Introduction

Monopolies in any sector can have a great impact on economic efficiency and, by extension, on the market and the larger economy. Data monopolies hurt both small startups and large, established companies, and it is typically the biggest corporate players who have the biggest data advantage. Google has recently lost a major antitrust case filed by the U.S. Department of Justice, which focused on the company's search engine dominance and expensive partnerships to promote its products. The lawsuit accused Google of using its dominant position in the search engine market to maintain a monopoly. The case has had a significant impact on consumers and the tech industry as a whole. This dominance allowed Google to raise prices on advertisers without consequences, and delay innovations and privacy features that consumers want when they search online.

Antitrust Allegations Against Google in the US and EU

In the case filed by the US Department of Justice, US District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google was monopolistic. In the 10-week-long trial, Google lost the major antitrust lawsuit, and it was established that the tech giant had a monopoly in the web search and advertising sectors. The lawsuit accused Google of using its dominant position in the search engine market to elbow out rivals and maintain a monopoly. The tech giant’s exclusive deals with handset makers were brought before the court as evidence. Additionally, the European Commission has fined Google €1.49 billion for breaching EU antitrust rules in 2019.

The Impact of Big Tech Monopolies on the Digital Ecosystem and Beyond 

• Big-tech companies collect vast amounts of personal data, raising concerns about how this data is used and protected. The concentration of data in the hands of a few companies can lead to privacy breaches and misuse of personal information.
• The dominance of a few tech giants in digital advertising markets can stifle competition, leading to higher prices for advertisers and fewer choices for consumers. This concentration also allows these companies to exert major control over what ads are shown and to whom.
• Big-tech platforms have substantial power over the dissemination of information. Their algorithms and policies on content moderation can influence public discourse and may spread misinformation. The lack of competition means fewer alternatives are accessible for users seeking different content moderation policies. In 2021 Google paid $26.3 billion to ensure its search engine is the default on smartphones and browsers and to keep control of its dominant market share.

Regulatory Mechanisms in the Indian Context

In India, antitrust issues are governed by the Competition Act of 2002 and the Competition Commission of India (CCI) checks monopolistic practices. In 2022, the CCI imposed a penalty of Rs 1,337.76 crore on Google for abusing its dominant position in multiple markets for 'anti-competitive practices' in the Android mobile device ecosystem. The Draft Digital Competition Bill, 2024, has been proposed as a legislative reform to regulate a wide range of digital services, including online search engines, social networking platforms, video-sharing sites, interpersonal communication services, operating systems, web browsers, cloud services, advertising services, and online intermediation services. The bill aims to promote competition and fairness in the digital market by addressing anti-competitive practices and dominant position abuses in the digital business space.

Conclusion

Big-tech companies are increasingly under scrutiny from regulators due to concerns over their monopolistic practices, data privacy issues, and the immense influence on markets and public discourse. The U.S. Department of Justice's victory against Google and the European Commission's hefty fines are indicators of a global paradigm shift towards more aggressive regulation to foster competition and protect consumer interests. The combined efforts of regulators across different jurisdictions underscore the recognition that monopolistic practices by such big tech giants can stifle innovation, harm consumers’ interests, and create barriers for new entrants, thus necessitating strong legal frameworks to ensure fair and contestable markets. Overall, the increasing regulatory pressure signifies a pivotal moment for big-tech companies, as they face the challenge of adapting to a more tightly controlled environment where their market dominance and business practices are under intense examination.

References

• https://www.livemint.com/technology/tech-news/googles-future-siege-u-s-court-explores-breaking-up-company-after-landmark-ruling-11723648047735.html
• https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/what-is-the-google-monopoly-antitrust-case-and-how-does-it-affect-consumers/article68495551.ece 
• https://indianexpress.com/article/business/google-has-an-illegal-monopoly-on-search-us-judge-finds-9497318/

‍

Introduction to Grooming

The term grooming is believed to have been first used by a group of investigators in the 1970s to describe patterns of seduction of an offender towards a child. It eventually evolved and began being commonly used by law enforcement agencies and has now replaced the term seduction for this behavioural pattern. At its core, grooming refers to conditioning a child by an adult offender to further their wrong motives. In its most popular sense, it refers to the sexual victimisation of children whereby an adult befriends a minor and builds an emotional connection to sexually abuse, exploit and even trafficking such a victim. The onset of technology has shifted the offline physical proximity of perpetrators to the internet, enabling groomers to integrate themselves completely into the victim’s life by maintaining consistent contact. It is noted that while grooming can occur online and offline, groomers often establish online contact before moving the ‘relationship’ offline to commit sexual offences.

Underreporting and Vulnerability of Teenagers

Given the elusive nature of the crime, cyber grooming remains one of the most underreported crimes by victims, who are often unaware or embarrassed to share their experiences. Teenagers are particularly more susceptible to cyber grooming since they not only have more access to the internet but also engage in more online risk-taking behaviours such as posting sensitive and personal pictures. Studies indicate that individuals aged 18 to 23 often lack awareness regarding the grooming process. They frequently engage in relationships with groomers without recognising the deceptive and manipulative tactics employed, mistakenly perceiving these relationships as consensual rather than abusive.

Rise of Cyber Grooming incidents after COVID-19 pandemic

There has been an uptick in cyber grooming after the COVID-19 pandemic, whereby an adult poses as a teenager or a child and befriends a minor on child-friendly websites or social media outlets and builds an emotional connection with the victim. The main goal is to obtain intimate and personal data of the minor, often in the form of sexual chats, pictures or videos, to threaten and coerce them into continuing such acts. The grooming process usually begins with seemingly harmless inquiries about the minor's age, interests, and family background. Over time, these questions gradually shift to topics concerning sexual experiences and desires. Research and data indicate that online grooming is primarily carried out by males, who frequently choose their victims based on attractiveness, ease of access, and the ability to exploit the minor's vulnerabilities. 

Beyond Sexual Exploitation: Ideological and Commercial Grooming

Grooming is not confined to sexual exploitation. The rise of technology has expanded the influence of extremist ideological groups, granting them access to children who can be coerced into adopting their beliefs. This phenomenon, known as ideological grooming, presents significant personal, social, national security, and law enforcement challenges. Additionally, a new trend, termed digital commercial grooming, involves malicious actors manipulating minors into procuring and using drugs. Violent extremists are improving their online recruitment strategies, learning from each other to target and recruit supporters more effectively and are constantly leveraging children’s vulnerabilities to reinforce anti-government ideologies.

Policy Recommendations to Combat Cyber Grooming

To address the pervasive issue of cyber grooming and child recruitment by extremist groups, several policy recommendations can be implemented. Social media and online platforms should enhance their monitoring and reporting systems to swiftly detect and remove grooming behaviours. This includes investing in AI technologies for content moderation and employing dedicated teams to respond to reports promptly. Additionally, collaborative efforts with cybersecurity experts and child psychologists to develop educational campaigns and tools that teach children about online safety and identify grooming tactics should be mandated. Legislation should also be strengthened to include provisions specifically addressing cyber grooming, ensuring strict penalties for offenders and protections for victims. In this regard, international cooperation among law enforcement agencies and tech companies is essential to create a unified approach to tackling cross-border online threats to children's safety and security.

References:

1. Lanning, Kenneth “The Evolution of Grooming: Concept and Term”, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2018, Vol. 33 (1) 5-16. https://www.nationalcac.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/The-evolution-of-grooming-Concept-and-term.pdf 
2. Jonie Chiu, Ethel Quayle, “Understanding online grooming: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of adolescents' offline meetings with adult perpetrators”, Child Abuse & Neglect, Volume 128, 2022, 105600, ISSN 0145-2134,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2022.105600. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014521342200120X 
3. “Online child sexual exploitation and abuse”, Sharinnf Electronic Resources on Laws and Crime, United Nations Office for Drugs and Crime. https://sherloc.unodc.org/cld/en/education/tertiary/cybercrime/module-12/key-issues/online-child-sexual-exploitation-and-abuse.html 
4. Mehrotra, Karishma, “In the pandemic, more Indian children are falling victim to online grooming for sexual exploitation” The Scroll.in, 18 September 2021. https://scroll.in/magazine/1005389/in-the-pandemic-more-indian-children-are-falling-victim-to-online-grooming-for-sexual-exploitation 
5. Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria, “Digital Grooming: Discourses of Manipulation and Cyber-Crime”, 18 December 2022 https://academic.oup.com/book/45362
6. Strategic orientations on a coordinated EU approach to prevention of radicalisation in 2022-2023 https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-03/2022-2023%20Strategic%20orientations%20on%20a%20coordinated%20EU%20approach%20to%20prevention%20of%20radicalisation_en.pdf 
7. “Handbook on Children Recruited and Exploited by Terrorist and Violent Extremist Groups: The Role of the Justice System”, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2017. https://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-reform/Child-Victims/Handbook_on_Children_Recruited_and_Exploited_by_Terrorist_and_Violent_Extremist_Groups_the_Role_of_the_Justice_System.E.pdf 

‍