#FactCheck - Viral Clip and Newspaper Article Claiming 18% GST on 'Good Morning' Messages Debunked

Introduction

‍

In today’s hyper-connected world, information spreads faster than ever before. But while much attention is focused on public platforms like Facebook and Twitter, a different challenge lurks in the shadows: misinformation circulating on encrypted and closed-network platforms such as WhatsApp and Telegram. Unlike open platforms where harmful content can be flagged in public, private groups operate behind a digital curtain. Here, falsehoods often spread unchecked, gaining legitimacy because they are shared by trusted contacts. This makes encrypted platforms a double-edged sword. It is essential for privacy and free expression, yet uniquely vulnerable to misuse.

As Prime Minister Narendra Modi rightly reminded,

‍

‍“Think 10 times before forwarding anything,” warning that even a “single fake news has the capability to snowball into a matter of national concern.”

‍

The Moderation Challenge with End-to-End Encryption

‍

Encrypted messaging platforms were built to protect personal communication. Yet, the same end-to-end encryption that shields users’ privacy also creates a blind spot for moderation. Authorities, researchers, and even the platforms themselves cannot view content circulating in private groups, making fact-checking nearly impossible.

Trust within closed groups makes the problem worse. When a message comes from family, friends, or community leaders, people tend to believe it without questioning and quickly pass it along. Features like large group chats, broadcast lists, and “forward to many” options further speed up its spread. Unlike open networks, there is no public scrutiny, no visible counter-narrative, and no opportunity for timely correction.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, false claims about vaccines spread widely through WhatsApp groups, undermining public health campaigns. Even more alarming, WhatsApp rumors about child kidnappers and cow meat in India triggered mob lynchings, leading to the tragic loss of life.

Encrypted platforms, therefore, represent a unique challenge: they are designed to protect privacy, but, unintentionally, they also protect the spread of dangerous misinformation.

‍

Approaches to Curbing Misinformation on End-to-End Platforms

‍

• Regulatory: Governments worldwide are exploring ways to access encrypted data on messaging platforms, creating tensions between the right to user privacy and crime prevention. Approaches like traceability requirements on WhatsApp, data-sharing mandates for platforms in serious cases, and stronger obligations to act against harmful viral content are also being considered.
• Technological Interventions: Platforms like WhatsApp have introduced features such as “forwarded many times” labels and limits on mass forwarding. These tools can be expanded further by introducing AI-driven link-checking and warnings for suspicious content.

• Community-Based Interventions: Ultimately, no regulation or technology can succeed without public awareness. People need to be inoculated against misinformation through pre-bunking efforts and digital literacy campaigns. Fact-checking websites and tools also have to be taught.

‍

Best Practices for Netizens

‍

Experts recommend simple yet powerful habits that every user can adopt to protect themselves and others. By adopting these, ordinary users can become the first line of defence against misinformation in their own communities:

• Cross-Check Before Forwarding: Verify claims from trusted platforms & official sources.
• Beware of Sensational Content: Headlines that sound too shocking or dramatic probably need checking. Consult multiple sources for a piece of news. If only one platform/ channel is carrying sensational news, it is likely to be clickbait or outright false.
• Stick to Trusted News Sources: Verify news through national newspapers and expert commentary. Remember, not everything on the internet/television is true.
• Look Out for Manipulated Media: Now, with AI-generated deepfakes, it becomes more difficult to tell the difference between original and manipulated media. Check for edited images, cropped videos, or voice messages without source information. Always cross-verify any media received.
• Report Harmful Content: Report misinformation to the platform it is being circulated on and PIB’s Fact Check Unit.

‍

Conclusion

‍

In closed, unmonitored groups, platforms like WhatsApp and Telegram often become safe havens where people trust and forward messages from friends and family without question. Once misinformation takes root, it becomes extremely difficult to challenge or correct, and over time, such actions can snowball into serious social, economic and national concerns.

Preventing this is a matter of shared responsibility. Governments can frame balanced regulations, but individuals must also take initiative: pause, think, and verify before sharing. Ultimately, the right to privacy must be upheld, but with reasonable safeguards to ensure it is not misused at the cost of societal trust and safety.

‍

References

‍

• India WhatsApp ‘child kidnap’ rumours claim two more victims (BBC) The people trying to fight fake news in India (BBC)
• Press Information Bureau – PIB Fact Check
• Brookings Institution – Encryption and Misinformation Report (2021)
• Curtis, T. L., Touzel, M. P., Garneau, W., Gruaz, M., Pinder, M., Wang, L. W., Krishna, S., Cohen, L., Godbout, J.-F., Rabbany, R., & Pelrine, K. (2024). Veracity: An Open-Source AI Fact-Checking System. arXiv.
• NDTV – PM Modi cautions against fake news (2022)
• Times of India – Govt may insist on WhatsApp traceability (2019)
• Medianama – Telegram refused to share ISIS channel data (2019)

‍

Introduction

In recent times the evolution of cyber laws has picked up momentum, primarily because of new and emerging technologies. However, just as with any other law, the same is also strengthened and substantiated by judicial precedents and judgements. Recently Delhi High Court has heard a matter between Tata Sky and Linkedin, where the court has asked them to present their Chief Grievance Officer details and SoP per the intermediary guidelines 2021.

Furthermore, in another news, officials from RBI and Meity have been summoned by the Parliamentary Standing Committee in order to address the rising issues of cyber securities and cybercrimes in India. This comes on the very first day of the monsoon session of the parliament this year. As we move towards the aspects of digital India, addressing these concerns are of utmost importance to safeguard the Indian Netizen.

The Issue

Tata Sky changed its name to Tata Play last year and has since then made its advent in the OTT sector as well. As the rebranding took place, the company was very cautious of anyone using the name Tata Sky in a bad light. Tata Play found that a lot of people on Linkedin had posted their work experience in Tata Sky for multiple years, as any new recruiter cannot verify the same. This poses a misappropriation of the brand’s name. This issue was reported to Linkedin multiple times by officials of Tata Play, but no significant action was seen. This led to an issue between the two brands; hence, a matter has been filed in front of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court to address the issue. The court has taken due cognisance of the issue, and hence in accordance with the Intermediary Guidelines 2021, the court has directed Linkedlin to provide the details of their Cheif Grievance Officer in the public domain and also to share the SoP for the redressal of issues and grievances. The guidelines made it mandatory for all intermediaries to set up a dedicated office in India and appoint a Chief Grievance Officer responsible for effective and efficient redressal of the platform-related offences and grievances within the stipulated period.

The job platform has also been ordered to share the SoPs and the various requirements and safety checks for users to create profiles over Linkedin. The policy of Linkedin is focused towards the users as well as the companies existing on the platform in order to create a synergy between the two.

RBI and Meity Official at Praliament

As we go deeper into cyberspace, especially after the pandemic, we have seen an exponential rise in cybercrimes. Based on statistics, 4 out of 10 people have been victims of cybercrimes in 2022-23, and it is estimated that 70% of the population has been subjected to direct or indirect cybercrime. As per the latest statistics, 85% of Indian children have been subjected to cyberbullying in some form or the other.

The government has taken note of the rising numbers of such crimes and threats, and hence the Parliamentary Committee has summoned the officials from RBI and the Ministery of Electronics and Information Technology to the parliament on July 20, 2023, i.e. the first day of monsoon session at the parliament. This comes at a very crucial time as the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill is to be tabled in the parliament this session and this marks the revamping of the legislation and regulations in the Indian cyberspace. As emerging technologies have started to surround us it is pertinent to create legal safeguards and practices to protect the Indian Netizen at large.

Conclusion

The legal crossroads between Tata Sky and Linkedin will go a long way in establishing the mandates under the Intermediary guidelines in the form of legal precedents. The compliance with the rule of law is the most crucial aspect of any democracy. Hence the separation of power between the Legislature, Judiciary and Execution has been fundamental in safeguarding basic and fundamental rights.  Similarly, the RBI and Meity officials being summoned to the parliament shows the transparency in the system and defines the true spirit of democracy., which will contribute towards creating a safe and secured Indian Cyberspace.

‍

Introduction

Social media platforms have begun to shape the public understanding of history in today’s digital landscape. You may have encountered videos, images, and posts that claim to reveal an untold story about our past. For example, you might have seen a post on your feed that has a painted or black and white image of a princess and labelled as "the most beautiful princess of Rajasthan who fought countless wars but has been erased from history.” Such emotionally charged narratives spread quickly, without any academic scrutiny or citation. Unfortunately, the originator believes it to be true. 

Such unverified content may look harmless. But it profoundly contributes to the systematic distortion of historical information. Such misinformation reoccurs on feeds and becomes embedded in popular memory. It misguides the public discourse and undermines the scholarly research on the relevant topic.  Sometimes, it also contributes to communal outrage and social tensions. It is time to recognise that protecting the integrity of our cultural and historical narratives is not only an academic concern but a legal and institutional responsibility. This is where the role of the Ministry of Culture becomes critical.

‍

Pseudohistorical News Information in India

Fake news and misinformation are frequently disseminated via images, pictures, and videos on various messaging applications, which is referred to as “WhatsApp University” in a derogatory way. WhatsApp has become India’s favourite method of communication, while users have to stay very conscious about what they are consuming from forwarded messages. Academic historians strive to understand the past in its context to differentiate it from the present, whereas pseudo-historians try to manipulate history to satisfy their political agendas. Unfortunately, this wave of pseudo-history is expanding rapidly, with platforms like 'WhatsApp University' playing a significant role in amplifying its spread. This has led to an increase in fake historical news and paid journalism. Unlike pseudo-history, academic history is created by professional historians in academic contexts, adhering to strict disciplinary guidelines, including peer review and expert examination of justifications, assertions, and publications.

‍

How to Identify Pseudo-Historic Misinformation 

1. Lack of Credible Sources: There is a lack of reliable primary and secondary sources. Instead, pseudohistorical works depend on hearsay and unreliable eyewitness accounts.

2. Selective Use of Evidence: Misinformative posts portray only those facts that support their argument and minimise the facts which is contradictory to their assertions.  

3. Incorporation of Conspiracy Theories: They often include conspiracy theories, which postulate secret groups, repressed knowledge. They might mention that evil powers influenced the historical events. Such hypotheses frequently lack any supporting data. 

4. Extravagant Claims: Pseudo-historic tales sometimes present unbelievable assertions about historic persons or events. 

5. Lack of Peer Review: Such work is generally never published on authentic academic platforms. You would not find them on platforms like LinkedIn, but on platforms like Instagram and Facebook, as they do not pitch for academic publications. Authentic historical research is examined by subject-matter authorities. 

6. Neglect of Established Historiographical Methods: Such posts lack knowledge of a recognised methodology and procedures, like the critical study of sources.

7. Ideologically Driven Narratives: Political, communal, ideological, and personal opinions are prioritised in such posts. The author has a prior goal, instead of finding the truth.

8. Exploitation of Gaps in the Historical Record: Pseudo-historians often use missing or unclear parts of history to suggest that regular historians are hiding important secrets. They make the story sound more mysterious than it is. 

9. Rejection of Scholarly Consensus: Pseudo-historians often reject the views of experts and historians, choosing instead to believe and promote their strange ideas.

10. Emphasis on Sensationalism: Pseudo-historical works may put more emphasis on sensationalism than academic rigour to pique public interest rather than offer a fair and thorough account of the history.

‍

Legal and Institutional Responsibility

Public opinion is the heart of democracy. It should not be affected by any misinformation or disinformation. Vested interests cannot be allowed to sabotage this public opinion. Specifically, when it concerns academia, it cannot be shared unverified without any fact-checking. Such unverified claims can be called out, and action can be taken only if the authorities take over the charge. In India, the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) regulates the historical academia. As per the official website, their stated aim is to “take all such measures as may be found necessary from time to time to promote historical research and its utilisation in the country,”. However, it is now essential to modernise the functioning of the ICHR to meet the demands of the digital era. Concerned authorities can run campaigns and awareness programmes to question the validity and research of such misinformative posts. Just as there are fact-checking mechanisms for news, there must also be an institutional push to fact-check and regulate historical content online. The following measures can be taken by authorities to strike down such misinformation online: 

1. Launch a nationwide awareness campaign about historical misinformation.
2. Work with scholars, historians, and digital platforms to promote verified content.
3. Encourage social media platforms to introduce fact-check labels for historical posts.
4. Consider legal frameworks that penalise the deliberate spread of false historical narratives.

History is part of our national heritage, and preserving its accuracy is a matter of public interest. Misinformation and pseudo-history are a combination that misleads the public and weakens the foundation of shared cultural identity. In this digital era, false narratives spread rapidly, and it is important to promote critical thinking, encourage responsible academic work, and ensure that the public has access to accurate and well-researched historical information. Protecting the integrity of history is not just the work of historians — it is a collective responsibility that serves the future of our democracy.

‍

References:

1. https://kuey.net/index.php/kuey/article/view/4091 
2. https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-news-editorials/social-media-and-the-menace-of-false-information 

‍