#FactCheck - Debunking Manipulated Photos of Smiling Secret Service Agents During Trump Assassination Attempt
Executive Summary:
Viral pictures featuring US Secret Service agents smiling while protecting former President Donald Trump during a planned attempt to kill him in Pittsburgh have been clarified as photoshopped pictures. The pictures making the rounds on social media were produced by AI-manipulated tools. The original image shows no smiling agents found on several websites. The event happened with Thomas Mathew Crooks firing bullets at Trump at an event in Butler, PA on July 13, 2024. During the incident one was deceased and two were critically injured. The Secret Service stopped the shooter, and circulating photos in which smiles were faked have stirred up suspicion. The verification of the face-manipulated image was debunked by the CyberPeace Research Team.

Claims:
Viral photos allegedly show United States Secret Service agents smiling while rushing to protect former President Donald Trump during an attempted assassination in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.



Fact Check:
Upon receiving the posts, we searched for any credible source that supports the claim made, we found several articles and images of the incident but in those the images were different.

This image was published by CNN news media, in this image we can see the US Secret Service protecting Donald Trump but not smiling. We then checked for AI Manipulation in the image using the AI Image Detection tool, True Media.


We then checked with another AI Image detection tool named, contentatscale AI image detection, which also found it to be AI Manipulated.

Comparison of both photos:

Hence, upon lack of credible sources and detection of AI Manipulation concluded that the image is fake and misleading.
Conclusion:
The viral photos claiming to show Secret Service agents smiling when protecting former President Donald Trump during an assassination attempt have been proven to be digitally manipulated. The original image found on CNN Media shows no agents smiling. The spread of these altered photos resulted in misinformation. The CyberPeace Research Team's investigation and comparison of the original and manipulated images confirm that the viral claims are false.
- Claim: Viral photos allegedly show United States Secret Service agents smiling while rushing to protect former President Donald Trump during an attempted assassination in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
- Claimed on: X, Thread
- Fact Check: Fake & Misleading
Related Blogs
.webp)
Introduction
YouTube is testing a new feature called ‘Notes,’ which allows users to add community-sourced context to videos. The feature allows users to clarify if a video is a parody or if it is misrepresenting information. The feature builds on existing features to provide helpful content alongside videos. Currently under testing, the feature will be available to a limited number of eligible contributors who will be invited to write notes on videos. These notes will appear publicly under a video if they are found to be broadly helpful. Viewers will be able to rate notes into three categories: ‘Helpful,’ ‘Somewhat helpful,’ or ‘Unhelpful’. Based on the ratings, YouTube will determine which notes are published. The feature will first be rolled out on mobile devices in the U.S. in English. The Google-owned platform will look at ways to improve the feature over time, including whether it makes sense to expand it to other markets.
YouTube To Roll Out The New ‘Notes’ Feature
YouTube is testing an experimental feature that allows users to add notes to provide relevant, timely, and easy-to-understand context for videos. This initiative builds on previous products that display helpful information alongside videos, such as information panels and disclosure requirements when content is altered or synthetic. YouTube in its blog clarified that the pilot will be available on mobiles in the U.S. and in the English language, to start with. During this test phase, viewers, participants, and creators are invited to give feedback on the quality of the notes.
YouTube further stated in its blog that a limited number of eligible contributors will be invited via email or Creator Studio notifications to write notes so that they can test the feature and add value to the system before the organisation decides on next steps and whether or not to expand the feature. Eligibility criteria include having an active YouTube channel in good standing with Yotube’s Community Guidelines.
Viewers in the U.S. will start seeing notes on videos in the coming weeks and months. In this initial pilot, third-party evaluators will rate the helpfulness of notes, which will help train the platform’s systems. As the pilot moves forward, contributors themselves will rate notes as well.
Notes will appear publicly under a video if they are found to be broadly helpful. People will be asked whether they think a note is helpful, somewhat helpful, or unhelpful and the reasons for the same. For example, if a note is marked as ‘Helpful,’ the evaluator will have the opportunity to specify if it is so because it cites high-quality sources or is written clearly and neutrally. A bridging-based algorithm will be used to consider these ratings and determine what notes are published. YouTube is excited to explore new ways to make context-setting even more relevant, dynamic, and unique to the videos we are watching, at scale, across the huge variety of content on YouTube.
CyberPeace Analysis: How Can Notes Help Counter Misinformation
The potential effectiveness of countering misinformation on YouTube using the proposed ‘Notes’ feature is significant. Enabling contributors to include notes on videos can offer relevant and accurate context to clarify any misleading or false information in the video. These notes can aid in enhancing viewers' comprehension of the content and detecting misinformation. The participation from users to rate the added notes as helpful, somewhat helpful, and unhelpful adds a heightened layer of transparency and public participation in identifying the accuracy of the content.
As YouTube intends to gather feedback from its various stakeholders to improve the feature over time, one can look forward to improved policy and practical over time: the feedback mechanism will allow for continuous refinement of the feature, ensuring it effectively addresses misinformation. The platform employs algorithms to identify helpful notes that cater to a broad audience across different perspectives. This helps showcase accurate information and combat misinformation.
Furthermore, along with the Notes feature, YouTube should explore and implement prebunking and debunking strategies on the platform by promoting educational content and empowering users to discern between fact and any misleading information.
Conclusion
The new feature, currently in the testing phase, aims to counter misinformation by providing context, enabling user feedback, leveraging algorithms, promoting transparency, and continuously improving information quality. Considering the diverse audience on the platform and high volumes of daily content consumption, it is important for both the platform operators and users to engage with factual, verifiable information. The fallout of misinformation on such a popular platform can be immense, and so, any mechanism or feature that can help counter the same must be developed to its full potential. Apart from this new Notes feature, YouTube has also implemented certain measures in the past to counter misinformation, such as providing authenticated sources to counter any election misinformation during the recent 2024 elections in India. These efforts are a welcome contribution to our shared responsibility as netizens to create a trustworthy, factual and truly-informational digital ecosystem.
References:
- https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/new-ways-to-offer-viewers-more-context/
- https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/internet/youtube-tests-feature-that-will-let-users-add-context-to-videos/article68302933.ece
.webp)
Introduction
In India, the rights of children with regard to protection of their personal data are enshrined under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 which is the newly enacted digital personal data protection law of India. The DPDP Act requires that for the processing of children's personal data, verifiable consent of parents or legal guardians is a necessary requirement. If the consent of parents or legal guardians is not obtained then it constitutes a violation under the DPDP Act. Under section 2(f) of the DPDP act, a “child” means an individual who has not completed the age of eighteen years.
Section 9 under the DPDP Act, 2023
With reference to the collection of children's data section 9 of the DPDP Act, 2023 provides that for children below 18 years of age, consent from Parents/Legal Guardians is required. The Data Fiduciary shall, before processing any personal data of a child or a person with a disability who has a lawful guardian, obtain verifiable consent from the parent or the lawful guardian. Section 9 aims to create a safer online environment for children by limiting the exploitation of their data for commercial purposes or otherwise. By virtue of this section, the parents and guardians will have more control over their children's data and privacy and they are empowered to make choices as to how they manage their children's online activities and the permissions they grant to various online services.
Section 9 sub-section (3) specifies that a Data Fiduciary shall not undertake tracking or behavioural monitoring of children or targeted advertising directed at children. However, section 9 sub-section (5) further provides room for exemption from this prohibition by empowering the Central Government which may notify exemption to specific data fiduciaries or data processors from the behavioural tracking or target advertising prohibition under the future DPDP Rules which are yet to be announced or released.
Impact on social media platforms
Social media companies are raising concerns about Section 9 of the DPDP Act and upcoming Rules for the DPDP Act. Section 9 prohibits behavioural tracking or targeted advertising directed at children on digital platforms. By prohibiting intermediaries from tracking a ‘child's internet activities’ and ‘targeted advertising’ - this law aims to preserve children's privacy. However, social media corporations contended that this limitation adversely affects the efficacy of safety measures intended to safeguard young users, highlighting the necessity of monitoring specific user signals, including from minors, to guarantee the efficacy of safety measures designed for them.
Social media companies assert that tracking teenagers' behaviour is essential for safeguarding them from predators and harmful interactions. They believe that a complete ban on behavioural tracking is counterproductive to the government's objectives of protecting children. The scope to grant exemption leaves the door open for further advocacy on this issue. Hence it necessitates coordination with the concerned ministry and relevant stakeholders to find a balanced approach that maintains both privacy and safety for young users.
Furthermore, the impact on social media platforms also extends to the user experience and the operational costs required to implement the functioning of the changes created by regulations. This also involves significant changes to their algorithms and data-handling processes. Implementing robust age verification systems to identify young users and protect their data will also be a technically challenging step for the various scales of platforms. Ensuring that children’s data is not used for targeted advertising or behavioural monitoring also requires sophisticated data management systems. The blanket ban on targeted advertising and behavioural tracking may also affect the personalisation of content for young users, which may reduce their engagement with the platform.
For globally operating platforms, aligning their practices with the DPDP Act in India while also complying with data protection laws in other countries (such as GDPR in Europe or COPPA in the US) can be complex and resource-intensive. Platforms might choose to implement uniform global policies for simplicity, which could impact their operations in regions not governed by similar laws. On the same page, competitive dynamics such as market shifts where smaller or niche platforms that cater specifically to children and comply with these regulations may gain a competitive edge. There may be a drive towards developing new, compliant ways of monetizing user interactions that do not rely on behavioural tracking.
CyberPeace Policy Recommendations
A balanced strategy should be taken into account which gives weightage to the contentions of social media companies as well as to the protection of children's personal information. Instead of a blanket ban, platforms can be obliged to follow and encourage openness in advertising practices, ensuring that children are not exposed to any misleading or manipulative marketing techniques. Self-regulation techniques can be implemented to support ethical behaviour, responsibility, and the safety of young users’ online personal information through the platform’s practices. Additionally, verifiable consent should be examined and put forward in a manner which is practical and the platforms have a say in designing the said verification. Ultimately, this should be dealt with in a manner that behavioural tracking and targeted advertising are not affecting the children's well-being, safety and data protection in any way.
Final Words
Under section 9 of the DPDP Act, the prohibition of behavioural tracking and targeted advertising in case of processing children's personal data - will compel social media platforms to overhaul their data collection and advertising practices, ensuring compliance with stricter privacy regulations. The legislative intent behind this provision is to enhance and strengthen the protection of children's digital personal data security and privacy. As children are particularly vulnerable to digital threats due to their still-evolving maturity and cognitive capacities, the protection of their privacy stands as a priority. The innocence of children is a major cause for concern when it comes to digital access because children simply do not possess the discernment and caution required to be able to navigate the Internet safely. Furthermore, a balanced approach needs to be adopted which maintains both ‘privacy’ and ‘safety’ for young users.
References
- https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Digital%20Personal%20Data%20Protection%20Act%202023.pdf
- https://www.firstpost.com/tech/as-govt-of-india-starts-preparing-rules-for-dpdp-act-social-media-platforms-worried-13789134.html#google_vignette
- https://www.business-standard.com/industry/news/social-media-platforms-worry-new-data-law-could-affect-child-safety-ads-124070400673_1.html

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