#FactCheck: AI-Generated Audio Falsely Claims COAS Admitted to Loss of 6 Jets and 250 Soldiers

Introduction

Twitter is a popular social media plate form with millions of users all around the world. Twitter’s blue tick system, which verifies the identity of high-profile accounts, has been under intense scrutiny in recent years. The platform must face backlash from its users and brands who have accused it of basis, inaccuracy, and inconsistency in its verification process. This blog post will explore the questions raised on the verification process and its impact on users and big brands.

What is Twitter’s blue trick System?

The blue tick system was introduced in 2009 to help users identify the authenticity of well-known public figures, Politicians, celebrities, sportspeople, and big brands. The Twitter blue Tick system verifies the identity of high-profile accounts to display a blue badge next to your username.

According to a survey, roughly there are 294,000 verified Twitter Accounts which means they have a blue tick badge with them and have also paid the subscription for the service, which is nearly $7.99 monthly, so think about those subscribers who have paid the amount and have also lost their blue badge won’t they feel cheated?

The Controversy

Despite its initial aim, the blue tick system has received much criticism from consumers and brands. Twitter’s irregular and non-transparent verification procedure has sparked accusations of prejudice and inaccuracy. Many Twitter users have complained that the network’s verification process is random and favours account with huge followings or celebrity status. In contrast, others have criticised the platform for certifying accounts that promote harmful or controversial content.

Furthermore, the verification mechanism has generated user confusion, as many need to understand the significance of the blue tick badge. Some users have concluded that the blue tick symbol represents a Twitter endorsement or that the account is trustworthy. This confusion has resulted in users following and engaging with verified accounts that promote misleading or inaccurate data, undermining the platform’s credibility.

How did the Blue Tick Row start in India?

On 21 May 2021, when the government asked Twitter to remove the blue badge from several profiles of high-profile Indian politicians, including the Indian National Congress Party Vice-President Mr Rahul Ghandhi.

The blue badge gives the users an authenticated identity. Many celebrities, including Amitabh Bachchan, popularly known as Big B, Vir Das, Prakash Raj, Virat Kohli, and Rohit Sharma, have lost their blue tick despite being verified handles.

What is the Twitter policy on blue tick?

To Twitter’s policy, blue verification badges may be removed from accounts if the account holder violates the company’s verification policy or terms of service. In such circumstances, Twitter typically notifies the account holder of the removal of the verification badge and the reason for the removal. In the instance of the “Twitter blue badge row” in India, however, it appears that Twitter did not notify the impacted politicians or their representatives before revoking their verification badges. Twitter’s lack of communication has exacerbated the controversy around the episode, with some critics accusing the company of acting arbitrarily and not following due process.

Is there a solution?

The “Twitter blue badge row” has no simple answer since it involves a complex convergence of concerns about free expression, social media policies, and government laws. However, here are some alternatives:

• Establish clear guidelines: Twitter should develop and constantly implement clear guidelines and policies for the verification process. All users, including politicians and government officials, would benefit from greater transparency and clarity.
• Increase transparency: Twitter’s decision-making process for deleting or restoring verification badges should be more open. This could include providing explicit reasons for badge removal, notifying impacted users promptly, and offering an appeals mechanism for those who believe their credentials were removed unfairly.
• Engage in constructive dialogue: Twitter should engage in constructive dialogue with government authorities and other stakeholders to address concerns about the platform’s content moderation procedures. This could contribute to a more collaborative approach to managing online content, leading to more effective and accepted policies.
• Follow local rules and regulations: Twitter should collaborate with the Indian government to ensure it conforms to local laws and regulations while maintaining freedom of expression. This could involve adopting more precise standards for handling requests for material removal or other actions from governments and other organisations.

Conclusion

To sum up, the “Twitter blue tick row” in India has highlighted the complex challenges that Social media faces daily in handling the conflicting interests of free expression, government rules, and their own content moderation procedures. While Twitter’s decision to withdraw the blue verification badges of several prominent Indian politicians garnered anger from the government and some public members, it also raised questions about the transparency and uniformity of Twitter’s verification procedure. In order to deal with this issue, Twitter must establish clear verification procedures and norms, promote transparency in its decision-making process, participate in constructive communication with stakeholders, and adhere to local laws and regulations. Furthermore, the Indian government should collaborate with social media platforms to create more effective and acceptable laws that balance the necessity for free expression and the protection of citizens’ rights. The “Twitter blue tick row” is just one example of the complex challenges that social media platforms face in managing online content, and it emphasises the need for greater collaboration among platforms, governments, and civil society organisations to develop effective solutions that protect both free expression and citizens’ rights.

Introduction 

Prebunking is a technique that shifts the focus from directly challenging falsehoods or telling people what they need to believe to understanding how people are manipulated and misled online to begin with. It is a growing field of research that aims to help people resist persuasion by misinformation. Prebunking, or "attitudinal inoculation," is a way to teach people to spot and resist manipulative messages before they happen.  The crux of the approach is rooted in taking a step backwards and nipping the problem in the bud by deepening our understanding of it, instead of designing redressal mechanisms to tackle it after the fact. It has been proven effective in helping a wide range of people build resilience to misleading information.

Prebunking is a psychological strategy for countering the effect of misinformation with the goal of assisting individuals in identifying and resisting deceptive content, hence increasing resilience against future misinformation. Online manipulation is a complex issue, and multiple approaches are needed to curb its worst effects. Prebunking provides an opportunity to get ahead of online manipulation, providing a layer of protection before individuals encounter malicious content. Prebunking aids individuals in discerning and refuting misleading arguments, thus enabling them to resist a variety of online manipulations. 

Prebunking builds mental defenses for misinformation by providing warnings and counterarguments before people encounter malicious content. Inoculating people against false or misleading information is a powerful and effective method for building trust and understanding along with a personal capacity for discernment and fact-checking. Prebunking teaches people how to separate facts from myths by teaching them the importance of thinking in terms of ‘how you know what you know’ and consensus-building. Prebunking uses examples and case studies to explain the types and risks of misinformation so that individuals can apply these learnings to reject false claims and manipulation in the future as well. 

How Prebunking Helps Individuals Spot Manipulative Messages

Prebunking helps individuals identify manipulative messages by providing them with the necessary tools and knowledge to recognize common techniques used to spread misinformation. Successful prebunking strategies include;

1. Warnings;
2. Preemptive Refutation: It explains the narrative/technique and how particular information is manipulative in structure. The Inoculation treatment messages typically include 2-3 counterarguments and their refutations. An effective rebuttal provides the viewer with skills to fight any erroneous or misleading information they may encounter in the future.
3. Micro-dosing: A weakened or practical example of misinformation that is innocuous. 

All these alert individuals to potential manipulation attempts. Prebunking also offers weakened examples of misinformation, allowing individuals to practice identifying deceptive content. It activates mental defenses, preparing individuals to resist persuasion attempts. Misinformation can exploit cognitive biases: people tend to put a lot of faith in things they’ve heard repeatedly - a fact that malicious actors manipulate by flooding the Internet with their claims to help legitimise them by creating familiarity. The ‘prebunking’ technique helps to create resilience against misinformation and protects our minds from the harmful effects of misinformation. 

Prebunking essentially helps people control the information they consume by teaching them how to discern between accurate and deceptive content. It enables one to develop critical thinking skills, evaluate sources adequately and identify red flags. By incorporating these components and strategies, prebunking enhances the ability to spot manipulative messages, resist deceptive narratives, and make informed decisions when navigating the very dynamic and complex information landscape online.

CyberPeace Policy Recommendations

• Preventing and fighting misinformation necessitates joint efforts between different stakeholders. The government and policymakers should sponsor prebunking initiatives and information literacy programmes to counter misinformation and adopt systematic approaches. Regulatory frameworks should encourage accountability in the dissemination of online information on various platforms. Collaboration with educational institutions, technological companies and civil society organisations can assist in the implementation of prebunking techniques in a variety of areas.
• Higher educational institutions should support prebunking and media literacy and offer professional development opportunities for educators, and scholars by working with academics and professionals on the subject of misinformation by producing research studies on the grey areas and challenges associated with misinformation.
• Technological companies and social media platforms should improve algorithm transparency, create user-friendly tools and resources, and work with fact-checking organisations to incorporate fact-check labels and tools.
• Civil society organisations and NGOs should promote digital literacy campaigns to spread awareness on misinformation and teach prebunking strategies and critical information evaluation. Training programmes should be available to help people recognise and resist deceptive information using prebunking tactics. Advocacy efforts should support legislation or guidelines that support and encourage prebunking efforts and promote media literacy as a basic skill in the digital landscape. 
• Media outlets and journalists including print & social media should follow high journalistic standards and engage in fact-checking activities to ensure information accuracy before release. Collaboration with prebunking professionals, cyber security experts, researchers and advocacy analysts can result in instructional content and initiatives that promote media literacy, prebunking strategies and misinformation awareness.

Final Words

The World Economic Forum's Global Risks Report 2024 identifies misinformation and disinformation as the top most significant risks for the next two years. Misinformation and disinformation are rampant in today’s digital-first reality, and the ever-growing popularity of social media is only going to see the challenges compound further. It is absolutely imperative for all netizens and stakeholders  to adopt proactive approaches to counter the growing problem of misinformation. Prebunking is a powerful problem-solving tool in this regard because it aims at ‘protection through prevention’ instead of limiting the strategy to harm reduction and redressal.  We can draw parallels with the concept of vaccination or inoculation, reducing the probability of a misinformation infection. Prebunking exposes us to a weakened form of misinformation and provides ways to identify it, reducing the chance false information takes root in our psyches.

The most compelling attribute of this approach is that the focus is not only on preventing damage but also creating widespread ownership and citizen participation in the problem-solving process. Every empowered individual creates an additional layer of protection against the scourge of misinformation, not only making safer choices for themselves but also lowering the risk of spreading false claims to others.  

References

• [1] https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_The_Global_Risks_Report_2024.pdf
• [2] https://prebunking.withgoogle.com/docs/A_Practical_Guide_to_Prebunking_Misinformation.pdf
• [3] https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/17634/3565

‍

Executive Summary:

Internship scams have infiltrated the academic landscape, scamming students of many prestigious colleges. The students often prefer to carry out internships to gain knowledge and work experience. These scams use the name of popular multinational companies to exploit the students. This report studies the various case studies, their modus operandi, impact on the students and preventive strategies. This report emphasises the importance of awareness and proactive measures to protect students from falling victim to such frauds.

1. Introduction

Internships are the opportunity to overcome the gap between the practical knowledge acquired at the university and practical experience, to get practical skills and contacts in the field of activity, as well as improve employment prospects. Instead, because of high paying internships and interesting positions students have become targets of work scams. As we have seen with the advancement in digital technology, scammers take advantage of the disguise of the internet, making very neat, smart, and convincing scams. 

 Internship scams are very prevalent and they include fake job listings and phishing schemes as well as payment frauds which make students lose lots of money and also emotionally expose them. In this specific case, this paper examines how these scams work, the warning signs, and ways of protecting students from falling victim to them.

2. Detailed Modus Operandi of Internship Scams

Internship scams often employ  a variety of tactics to attract and deceive unsuspecting students. Below is a detailed breakdown of the common methods used by scammers:

1. Fake Job Listings and Offers:some text
   • Scammers post attractive internship offers on popular job portals, social media platforms, and even send personalised messages via LinkedIn. These listings often mimic the branding and style of reputable companies, including well-designed logos, professional email addresses, and official-looking websites.
   • Example: A fake internship offer from a reputed software firm circulates on a job portal, with a professional landing page. Students who apply are quickly “hired” without any interviews, and are asked to pay a security deposit to confirm their acceptance.
2. Upfront Payment Requests:some text
   • Scammers ask for payment such as registration fees, training materials, background checks, or security deposits. These payments comes under non-refundable payment  and it act as the primary revenue stream for the fraudsters.
   • Example: A group of students receive internship offers requiring a payment of INR 10,000 for "training materials" and "online assessments." After making the payment, the students never hear back from the company, and all attempts to contact them were futile.
3. Phishing and Identity Theft:some text
   • Beyond financial fraud, some scams aim to steal personal information. Fake internship applications often require detailed personal data, including identity proofs, bank account details. This data will be used as identity theft or sold on the dark web.
   • Example: A student applies for an internship that asks for copies of identification documents and bank details. This information sharing led to unauthorised transactions in their bank account. 
4. Work-from-Home Frauds:some text
   • With the rise of remote work, scammers also offer work-from-home internships that require students to purchase software or pay for specialised training. After payment, students are often given irrelevant tasks or no tasks at all, leaving them with no real work experience.
   • Example: An internship advertised as a "remote data analysis role" required students to buy a proprietary software licence. After paying, students realised the software was freely available online, and the internship tasks were non-existent.
5. Impersonation of Reputed Companies:some text
   • Scammers use the name of well-known companies, they modify the email addresses or create fake websites that look original. They use these platforms to send offer letters, making it difficult for students to identify the scam.
   • Example: A scammer creates a fake website mirroring a major consulting firm's internship page. The only difference is a minor change in the URL. Dozens of students are duped into paying registration fees.

3. Case Studies of Real-Life Incidents

1. Case Study 1: The Certification Course and Internshipsome text
   • A group of students received personalised emails from an official domain of a reputed tech industry providing an internship offer. Students were asked to pay Rs 10,000 to undergo a certification course to carry the internship. After paying the amount, the students did not receive any instructions, and the company was found to be nonexistent. The scammer had spoofed the company’s email domain, making it difficult to trace the source.
2. Case Study 2: The Social Media Trapsome text
   • A student from a university encountered an internship post on Instagram, advertising roles at a popular fashion brand. The application process involved a "screening fee" of INR 5,000. Despite appearing legitimate, the internship was fake, and the brand had no knowledge of the post. The student's personal data was also compromised, leading to unauthorised social media activity.
3. Case Study 3: Internship Providing Social Platformssome text
   • A popular internship providing platform, faced an incident where a scammer posted fraudulent internship offers under the guise of a major multinational. The scam involved asking students to purchase expensive software to start their work. The platform had to issue warnings and remove the listings after several complaints.

4. The Impact on Students

The consequences of internship scams extend beyond immediate financial loss, affecting students on multiple levels:

1. Financial Impact:some text
   • Students lose their money, ranging from minor fees to significant payments.
2. Emotional and Psychological Distress:some text
   • These kinds of scams can lead to anxiety, depression and loss of confidence in availing the opportunities in future. 
3. Exposure to Further Scams:some text
   • Scammers often share details of their victims with other fraudsters, making students susceptible to repeated scams, including phishing attacks, financial frauds, and unsolicited offers.

5. Preventive Measures

1. Verification of Internships:some text
   • Always verify the authenticity of the internship by researching the company on official platforms such as LinkedIn, the company’s official website, and through trusted contacts or college placement cells.
2. Avoid Upfront Payments:some text
   • Employers do not ask for money in exchange for job or internship offers. If they demand for any kind of payment, then the employer is not original. Always question the necessity of such payments and consult trusted advisors before proceeding.
3. Use Trusted Job Portals:some text
   • Apply for internships through recognized platforms like LinkedIn, Internshala, or your college’s placement cell, which have verification processes to filter out fraudulent postings.
4. Reporting Scams:some text
   • Report suspicious offers to your college authorities, placement cells, and local cybercrime departments. Additionally, use platforms like Internshala’s “Report This Job” feature to flag fraudulent listings.
5. Stay Educated and Updated:some text
   • It is important to educate students by providing workshops, webinars, and awareness sessions on cybersecurity to stay informed and report about the latest scams. 

6. Conclusion

Internship scams are a severe threat to the student society since they manipulate the student’s desire for an internship. The best ways to prevent such cons are by being cautious and receptive to whatever is being offered. Internship seekers, colleges and the placement cells have to work hand in hand to ensure that there is no fear among  people seeking internships.

References

1. Smith, J. (2024). Internship Scams on the Rise: How to Spot and Avoid Them. Retrieved from example1.com.
2. Brown, A. (2023). Student Internship Scams in India: A Growing Concern. Retrieved from example2.com.
3. Johnson, L. (2024). How to Protect Yourself from Fake Internship Offers. Retrieved from example3.com.
4. Gupta, R. (2024). Social Media and the Rise of Job Scams. Retrieved from example4.com.

‍