#FactCheck -Analysis Reveals AI-Generated Anomalies in Viral ‘Russia Snow Jump’ Video”

Introduction

The ongoing armed conflict between Israel and Hamas/ Palestine is in the news all across the world. The latest conflict was triggered by unprecedented attacks against Israel by Hamas militants on October 7, killing thousands of people. Israel has launched a massive counter-offensive against the Islamic militant group. Amid the war, the bad information and propaganda spreading on various social media platforms, tech researchers have detected a network of 67 accounts that posted false content about the war and received millions of views. The ‘European Commission’ has sent a letter to Elon Musk, directing them to remove illegal content and disinformation; otherwise, penalties can be imposed. The European Commission has formally requested information from several social media giants on their handling of content related to the Israel-Hamas war. This widespread disinformation impacts and triggers the nature of war and also impacts the world and affects the goodwill of the citizens. The bad group, in this way, weaponise the information and fuels online hate activity, terrorism and extremism, flooding political polarisation with hateful content on social media. Online misinformation about the war is inciting extremism, violence, hate and different propaganda-based ideologies. The online information environment surrounding this conflict is being flooded with disinformation and misinformation, which amplifies the nature of war and too many fake narratives and videos are flooded on social media platforms.

Response of social media platforms 

As there is a proliferation of online misinformation and violent content surrounding the war, It imposes a question on social media companies in terms of content moderation and other policy shifts.  It is notable that Instagram, Facebook and X(Formerly Twitter) all have certain features in place giving users the ability to decide what content they want to view. They also allow for limiting the potentially sensitive content from being displayed in search results.

The experts say that It is of paramount importance to get a sort of control in this regard and define what is permissible online and what is not, Hence, what is required is expertise to determine the situation, and most importantly, It requires robust content moderation policies. 

During wartime, people who are aggrieved or provoked are often targeted by this internet disinformation that blends ideological beliefs and spreads conspiracy theories and hatred. This is not a new phenomenon, it is often observed that disinformation-spreading groups emerged and became active during such war and emergency times and spread disinformation and propaganda-based ideologies and influence the society at large by misrepresenting the facts and planted stories. Social media has made it easier to post user-generated content without properly moderating it. However, it is a shared responsibility of tech companies, users, government guidelines and policies to collectively define and follow certain mechanisms to fight against disinformation and misinformation.  

Digital Services Act (DSA)

The newly enacted EU law, i.e. Digital Services Act, pushes various larger online platforms to prevent posts containing illegal content and also puts limits on targeted advertising. DSA enables to challenge the of illegal online content and also poses requirements to prevent misinformation and disinformation and ensure more transparency over what the users see on the platforms. Rules under the DSA cover everything from content moderation & user privacy to transparency in operations. DSA is a landmark EU legislation moderating online platforms.  Large tech platforms are now subject to content-related regulation under this new EU law ‘The Digital Services Act’, which also requires them to prevent the spread of misinformation and disinformation and overall ensure a safer online environment.

Indian Scenario

The Indian government introduced the Intermediary Guidelines (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, updated in 2023 which talks about the establishment of a "fact check unit" to identify false or misleading online content. Digital Personal Data Protection, 2023 has also been enacted which aims to protect personal data. The upcoming Digital India bill is also proposed to be tabled in the parliament, this act will replace the current Information & Technology Act, of 2000. The upcoming Digital India bill can be seen as future-ready legislation to strengthen India’s current cybersecurity posture. It will comprehensively deal with the aspects of ensuring privacy, data protection, and fighting growing cyber crimes in the evolving digital landscape and ensuring a safe digital environment. Certain other entities including civil societies are also actively engaged in fighting misinformation and spreading awareness for safe and responsible use of the Internet. 

Conclusion:

The widespread disinformation and misinformation content amid the Israel-Hamas war showcases how user-generated content on social media shows you the illusion of reality. There is widespread misinformation, misleading content or posts on social media platforms, and misuse of new advanced AI technologies that even make it easier for bad actors to create synthetic media content. It is also notable that social media has connected us like never before. Social media is a great platform with billions of active social media users around the globe, it offers various conveniences and opportunities to individuals and businesses. It is just certain aspects that require the attention of all of us to prevent the bad use of social media. The social media platforms and regulatory authorities need to be vigilant and active in clearly defining and improving the policies for content regulation and safe and responsible use of social media which can effectively combat and curtail the bad actors from misusing social media for their bad motives. As a user, it's the responsibility of users to exercise certain duties and promote responsible use of social media. With the increasing penetration of social media and the internet, misinformation is rampant all across the world and remains a global issue which needs to be addressed properly by implementing strict policies and adopting best practices to fight the misinformation. Users are encouraged to flag and report misinformative or misleading content on social media and should always verify it from authentic sources. Hence creating a safer Internet environment for everyone.

References:

• https://abcnews.go.com/US/experts-fear-hate-extremism-social-media-israel-hamas-war/story?id=104221215
• https://edition.cnn.com/2023/10/14/tech/social-media-misinformation-israel-hamas/index.html
• https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/13/business/israel-hamas-misinformation-social-media-x.html
• https://www.africanews.com/2023/10/24/fact-check-misinformation-about-the-israel-hamas-war-is-flooding-social-media-here-are-the//
• https://www.theverge.com/23845672/eu-digital-services-act-explained

‍

Executive Summary

The IT giant Apple has alerted customers to the impending threat of "mercenary spyware" assaults in 92 countries, including India. These highly skilled attacks, which are frequently linked to both private and state actors  (such as the NSO Group’s Pegasus spyware), target specific individuals, including politicians, journalists, activists and diplomats. In sharp contrast to consumer-grade malware, these attacks are in a league unto themselves: highly-customized to fit the individual target and involving significant resources to create and use.

As the incidence of such attacks rises, it is important that all persons, businesses, and officials equip themselves with information about how such mercenary spyware programs work, what are the most-used methods, how these attacks can be prevented and what one must do if targeted. Individuals and organizations can begin protecting themselves against these attacks by enabling "Lockdown Mode" to provide an extra layer of security to their devices and by frequently changing passwords and by not visiting the suspicious URLs or attachments. 

Introduction: Understanding Mercenary Spyware

Mercenary spyware is a special kind of spyware that is developed exclusively for law enforcement and government organizations. These kinds of spywares are not available in app stores, and are developed for attacking a particular individual and require a significant investment of resources and advanced technologies. Mercenary spyware hackers infiltrate systems by means of techniques such as phishing (by sending malicious links or attachments), pretexting (by manipulating the individuals to share personal information) or baiting (using tempting offers). They often intend to use Advanced Persistent Threats (APT)  where the hackers remain undetected for a prolonged period of time to steal data by continuous stealthy infiltration of the target’s network. The other method to gain access is through zero-day vulnerabilities, which is the process of gaining access to mobile devices using vulnerabilities existing in software. A well-known example of mercenary spyware includes the infamous Pegasus by the NSO Group.

Actions:  By Apple against Mercenary Spyware

Apple has introduced an advanced, optional protection feature in its newer product versions (including iOS 16, iPadOS 16, and macOS Ventura) to combat mercenary spyware attacks. These features have been provided to the users who are at risk of targeted cyber attacks.

Apple released a statement on the matter, sharing, “mercenary spyware attackers apply exceptional resources to target a very small number of specific individuals and their devices. Mercenary spyware attacks cost millions of dollars and often have a short shelf life, making them much harder to detect and prevent.”

When Apple's internal threat intelligence and investigations detect these highly-targeted attacks, they take immediate action to notify the affected users. The notification process involves:

• Displaying a "Threat Notification" at the top of the user's Apple ID page after they sign in.

• Sending an email and iMessage alert to the addresses and phone numbers associated with the user's Apple ID.
• Providing clear instructions on steps the user should take to protect their devices, including enabling "Lockdown Mode" for the strongest available security.
• Apple stresses that these threat notifications are "high-confidence alerts" - meaning they have strong evidence that the user has been deliberately targeted by mercenary spyware. As such, these alerts should be taken extremely seriously by recipients.

Modus Operandi of Mercenary Spyware

1. Installing advanced surveillance equipment remotely and covertly.

2. Using zero-click or one-click attacks to take advantage of device vulnerabilities.

3. Gain access to a variety of data on the device, including location tracking, call logs, text messages, passwords, microphone, camera, and app information.

4. Installation by utilizing many system vulnerabilities on devices running particular iOS and Android versions.

5. Defense by patching vulnerabilities with security updates (e.g., CVE-2023-41991, CVE-2023-41992, CVE-2023-41993).

6. Utilizing defensive DNS services, non-signature-based endpoint technologies, and frequent device reboots as mitigation techniques.

Prevention Measures: Safeguarding Your Devices

1. Turn on security measures: Make use of the security features that the device maker has supplied, such as Apple's Lockdown Mode, which is intended to prevent viruses of all types from infecting Apple products, such as iPhones.

2. Frequent software upgrades: Make sure the newest security and software updates are installed on your devices. This aids in patching holes that mercenary malware could exploit.

3. Steer clear of misleading connections: Exercise caution while opening attachments or accessing links from unidentified sources. Installing mercenary spyware is possible via phishing links or attachments.

4. Limit app permissions: Reassess and restrict app permissions to avoid unwanted access to private information.

5. Use secure networks: To reduce the chance of data interception, connect to secure Wi-Fi networks and stay away from public or unprotected connections.

6. Install security applications: To identify and stop any spyware attacks, think about installing reliable security programs from reliable sources.

7. Be alert: If Apple or other device makers send you a threat notice, consider it carefully and take the advised security precautions.

8. Two-factor authentication: To provide an extra degree of protection against unwanted access, enable two-factor authentication (2FA) on your Apple ID and other significant accounts.

9. Consider additional security measures: For high-risk individuals, consider using additional security measures, such as encrypted communication apps and secure file storage services

Way Forward: Strengthening Digital Defenses, Strengthening Democracy

People, businesses and administrations must prioritize cyber security measures and keep up with emerging dangers as mercenary spyware attacks continue to develop and spread. To effectively address the growing threat of digital espionage, cooperation between government agencies, cybersecurity specialists, and technology businesses is essential.

In the Indian context, the update carries significant policy implications and must inspire a discussion on legal frameworks for government surveillance practices and cyber security protocols in the nation. As the public becomes more informed about such sophisticated cyber threats, we can expect a greater push for oversight mechanisms and regulatory protocols. The misuse of surveillance technology poses a significant threat to individuals and institutions alike. Policy reforms concerning surveillance tech must be tailored to address the specific concerns of the use of such methods by state actors vs. private players. 

There is a pressing need for electoral reforms that help safeguard democratic processes in the current digital age. There has been a paradigm shift in how political activities are conducted in current times: the advent of the digital domain has seen parties and leaders pivot their campaigning efforts to favor the online audience as enthusiastically as they campaign offline. Given that this is an election year, quite possibly the most significant one in modern Indian history, digital outreach and online public engagement are expected to be at an all-time high. And so, it is imperative to protect the electoral process against cyber threats so that public trust in the legitimacy of India’s democratic is rewarded and the digital domain is an asset, and not a threat, to good governance.

‍

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 

‍