#Fact Check: Viral Video Falsely Claims Israel Launched Nuclear Attack on Iran

Introduction 

The link between social media and misinformation is undeniable. Misinformation, particularly the kind that evokes emotion, spreads like wildfire on social media and has serious consequences, like undermining democratic processes, discrediting science, and promulgating hateful discourses which may incite physical violence. If left unchecked, misinformation propagated through social media has the potential to incite social disorder, as seen in countless ethnic clashes worldwide.  This is why social media platforms have been under growing pressure to combat misinformation and have been developing models such as fact-checking services and community notes to check its spread. This article explores the pros and cons of the models and evaluates their broader implications for online information integrity.

How the Models Work 

1. Third-Party Fact-Checking Model (formerly used by Meta) Meta initiated this program in 2016 after claims of extraterritorial election tampering through dis/misinformation on its platforms. It entered partnerships with third-party organizations like AFP and specialist sites like Lead Stories and PolitiFact, which are certified by the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) for meeting neutrality, independence, and editorial quality standards. These fact-checkers identify misleading claims that go viral on platforms and publish verified articles on their websites, providing correct information. They also submit this to Meta through an interface, which may link the fact-checked article to the social media post that contains factually incorrect claims. The post then gets flagged for false or misleading content, and a link to the article appears under the post for users to refer to. This content will be demoted in the platform algorithm, though not removed entirely unless it violates Community Standards. However, in January 2025, Meta announced it was scrapping this program and beginning to test X’s Community Notes Model in the USA, before rolling it out in the rest of the world. It alleges that the independent fact-checking model is riddled with personal biases, lacks transparency in decision-making, and has evolved into a censoring tool. 
2. Community Notes Model ( Used by X and being tested by Meta): This model relies on crowdsourced contributors who can sign up for the program, write contextual notes on posts and rate the notes made by other users on X. The platform uses a bridging algorithm to display those notes publicly, which receive cross-ideological consensus from voters across the political spectrum. It does this by boosting those notes that receive support despite the political leaning of the voters, which it measures through their engagements with previous notes. The benefit of this system is that it is less likely for biases to creep into the flagging mechanism. Further, the process is relatively more transparent than an independent fact-checking mechanism since all Community Notes contributions are publicly available for inspection, and the ranking algorithm can be accessed by anyone, allowing for external evaluation of the system by anyone. 

CyberPeace Insights

Meta’s uptake of a crowdsourced model signals social media’s shift toward decentralized content moderation, giving users more influence in what gets flagged and why. However, the model’s reliance on diverse agreements can be a time-consuming process. A study (by Wirtschafter & Majumder, 2023) shows that only about 12.5 per cent of all submitted notes are seen by the public, making most misleading content go unchecked. Further, many notes on divisive issues like politics and elections may not see the light of day since reaching a consensus on such topics is hard. This means that many misleading posts may not be publicly flagged at all, thereby hindering risk mitigation efforts. This casts aspersions on the model’s ability to check the virality of posts which can have adverse societal impacts, especially on vulnerable communities. On the other hand, the fact-checking model suffers from a lack of transparency, which has damaged user trust and led to allegations of bias. 

Since both models have their advantages and disadvantages, the future of misinformation control will require a hybrid approach. Data accuracy and polarization through social media are issues bigger than an exclusive tool or model can effectively handle. Thus, platforms can combine expert validation with crowdsourced input to allow for accuracy, transparency, and scalability. 

Conclusion 

Meta’s shift to a crowdsourced model of fact-checking is likely to have bigger implications on public discourse since social media platforms hold immense power in terms of how their policies affect politics, the economy, and societal relations at large.  This change comes against the background of sweeping cost-cutting in the tech industry, political changes in the USA and abroad, and increasing attempts to make Big Tech platforms more accountable in jurisdictions like the EU and Australia, which are known for their welfare-oriented policies. These co-occurring contestations are likely to inform the direction the development of misinformation-countering tactics will take.  Until then, the crowdsourcing model is still in development, and its efficacy is yet to be seen, especially regarding polarizing topics. 

References 

• https://www.cyberpeace.org/resources/blogs/new-youtube-notes-feature-to-help-users-add-context-to-videos
• https://en-gb.facebook.com/business/help/315131736305613?id=673052479947730
• http://techxplore.com/news/2025-01-meta-fact.html 
• https://about.fb.com/news/2025/01/meta-more-speech-fewer-mistakes/ 
• https://communitynotes.x.com/guide/en/about/introduction 
• https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2025/01/14/do-community-notes-work/?utm_source=chatgpt.com 
• https://www.techpolicy.press/community-notes-and-its-narrow-understanding-of-disinformation/ 
• https://www.rstreet.org/commentary/metas-shift-to-community-notes-model-proves-that-we-can-fix-big-problems-without-big-government/ 
• https://tsjournal.org/index.php/jots/article/view/139/57 

‍

Starting in mid-December, 2024, a series of attacks have targeted Chrome browser extensions. A data protection company called Cyberhaven, California, fell victim to one of these attacks. Though identified in the U.S., the geographical extent and potential of the attack are yet to be determined. Assessment of these cases can help us to be better prepared for such instances if they occur in the near future. 

The Attack

Browser extensions are small software applications that add and enable functionality or a capacity (feature) to a web browser. These are written in CSS, HTML, or JavaScript and like other software, can be coded to deliver malware. Also known as plug-ins, they have access to their own set of Application Programming Interface (APIs). They can also be used to remove unwanted elements as per customisation, such as pop-up advertisements and auto-play videos, when one lands on a website. Some examples of browser extensions include Ad-blockers (for blocking ads and content filtering) and StayFocusd (which limits the time of the users on a particular website).

In the aforementioned attack, the publisher of the browser at Cyberhaven received a phishing mail from an attacker posing to be from the Google Chrome Web Store Developer Support. It mentioned that their browser policies were not compatible and encouraged the user to click on the “Go to Policy”action item,  which led the user to a page that enabled permissions for a malicious OAuth called Privacy Policy Extension (Open Authorisation is an adopted standard that is used to authorise secure access for temporary tokens). Once the permission was granted, the attacker was able to inject malicious code into the target’s Chrome browser extension and steal user access tokens and session cookies. Further investigation revealed that logins of certain AI and social media platforms were targeted.

CyberPeace Recommendations

As attacks of such range continue to occur, it is encouraged that companies and developers take active measures that would make their browser extensions less susceptible to such attacks. Google also has a few guidelines on how developers can safeguard their extensions from their end. These include:

1. Minimal Permissions For Extensions- It is encouraged that minimal permissions for extensions barring the required APIs and websites that it depends on are acquired as limiting extension privileges limits the surface area an attacker can exploit.
2. Prioritising Protection Of Developer Accounts- A security breach on this end could lead to compromising all users' data as this would allow attackers to mess with extensions via their malicious codes. A 2FA (2-factor authentication) by setting a security key is endorsed.
3. HTTPS over HTTP- HTTPS should be preferred over HTTP as it requires a Secure Sockets Layer (SSL)/ transport layer security(TLS) certificate from an independent certificate authority (CA). This creates an encrypted connection between the server and the web browser.

Lastly, as was done in the case of the attack at Cyberhaven, it is encouraged to promote the practice of transparency when such incidents take place to better deal with them.

References

1. https://indianexpress.com/article/technology/tech-news-technology/hackers-hijack-companies-chrome-extensions-cyberhaven-9748454/
2. https://indianexpress.com/article/technology/tech-news-technology/google-chrome-extensions-hack-safety-tips-9751656/
3. https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/browser-extension
4. https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2024/12/31/google-chrome-2fa-bypass-attack-confirmed-what-you-need-to-know/
5. https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ssl/why-use-https/

Introduction 

The pervasive issue of misinformation in India is a multifaceted challenge with profound implications for democratic processes, public awareness, and social harmony. The Election Commission of India (ECI) has taken measures to counter misinformation during the 2024 elections. ECI has launched campaigns to educate people and urge them to verify election-related content and share responsibly on social media. In response to the proliferation of fake news and misinformation online, the ECI has introduced initiatives such as ‘Myth vs. Reality’ and  'VerifyBeforeYouAmplify' to clear the air around fake news being spread on social media. EC measures aim to ensure that the spread of misinformation is curbed, especially during election time, when voters consume a lot of information from social media. It is of the utmost importance that voters take in facts and reliable information and avoid any manipulative or fake information that can negatively impact the election process. 

EC Collaboration with Tech Platforms

In this new age of technology, the Internet and social media continue to witness a surge in the spread of misinformation, disinformation, synthetic media content, and deepfake videos. This has rightly raised serious concerns. The responsible use of social media is instrumental in maintaining the accuracy of information and curbing misinformation incidents. 

The ECI has collaborated with Google to empower the citizenry by making it easy to find critical voting information on Google Search and YouTube. In this way, Google supports the 2024 Indian General Election by providing high-quality information to voters, safeguarding platforms from abuse, and helping people navigate AI-generated content. The company connects voters to helpful information through product features that show data from trusted organisations across its portfolio. YouTube showcases election information panels, including how to register to vote, how to vote, and candidate information. YouTube's recommendation system prominently features content from authority sources on the homepage, in search results, and in the "Up Next" panel. YouTube highlights high-quality content from authoritative news sources during key moments through its Top News and Breaking News shelves, as well as the news watch page. 

Google has also implemented strict policies and restrictions regarding who can run election-related advertising campaigns on its platforms. They require all advertisers who wish to run election ads to undergo an identity verification process, provide a pre-certificate issued by the ECI or anyone authorised by the ECI for each election ad they want to run where necessary, and have in-ad disclosures that clearly show who paid for the ad. Additionally, they have long-standing ad policies that prohibit ads from promoting demonstrably false claims that could undermine trust or participation in elections.

CyberPeace Countering Misinformation

CyberPeace Foundation, a leading organisation in the field of cybersecurity works to promote digital peace for all. CyberPeace is working on the wider ecosystem to counter misinformation and develop a safer and more responsible Internet. CyberPeace has collaborated with Google.org to run a pan-India awareness-building program and comprehensive multilingual digital resource hub with content available in up to 15 Indian languages to empower over 40 million netizens in building resilience against misinformation and practising responsible online behaviour. This step is crucial in creating a strong foundation for a trustworthy  Internet and secure digital landscape.  

Myth vs Reality Register by ECI

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has launched the 'Myth vs Reality Register' to combat misinformation and ensure the integrity of the electoral process during the general elections 2024. The 'Myth vs Reality Register' can be accessed through the Election Commission's official website (https://mythvsreality.eci.gov.in/). All stakeholders are urged to verify and corroborate any dubious information they receive through any channel with the information provided in the register. The register provides a one-stop platform for credible and authenticated election-related information, with the factual matrix regularly updated to include the latest busted fakes and fresh FAQs. The ECI has identified misinformation as one of the challenges, along with money, muscle, and Model Code of Conduct violations, for electoral integrity. The platform can be used to verify information, prevent the spread of misinformation, debunk myths, and stay informed about key issues during the General Elections 2024.

The ECI has taken proactive steps to combat the challenge of misinformation which could cripple the democratic process. EC has issued directives urging vigilance and responsibility from all stakeholders, including political parties, to verify information before amplifying it. The EC has also urged responsible behaviour on social media platforms and discourse that inspires unity rather than division. The commission has stated that originators of false information will face severe consequences, and nodal officers across states will remove unlawful content. Parties are encouraged to engage in issue-based campaigning and refrain from disseminating unverified or misleading advertisements.

Conclusion

The steps taken by the ECI have been designed to empower citizens and help them affirm the accuracy and authenticity of content before amplifying it. All citizens must be well-educated about the entire election process in India. This includes information on how the electoral rolls are made, how candidates are monitored, a complete database of candidates and candidate backgrounds, party manifestos, etc. For informed decision-making, active reading and seeking information from authentic sources is imperative. The partnership between government agencies, tech platforms and civil societies helps develop strategies to counter the widespread misinformation and promote online safety in general, and electoral integrity in particular. 

References 

• https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2017375

• https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2016941#:~:text=To%20combat%20the%20spread%20of,the%20ongoing%20General%20Elections%202024
• https://www.business-standard.com/elections/lok-sabha-election/ls-elections-2024-ec-uses-social-media-to-nudge-electors-to-vote-124040700429_1.html
• https://blog.google/intl/en-in/company-news/outreach-initiatives/supporting-the-2024-indian-general-election/
• https://blog.google/intl/en-in/partnering-indias-success-in-a-new-digital-paradigm/

‍