#FactCheck - Fake Video Uses AI Voice to Falsely Attribute Remarks on Prasidh Krishna to Virat Kohli

Executive Summary:

‍

A video is circulating on social media claiming to be footage of the aftermath of Iran's missile strikes on Israel. The video shows destruction, damaged infrastructure, and panic among civilian casualties. After our own digital verification, visual inspection, and frame-by-frame inspection, we have determined that the video is fake. The video is just AI-generated clips and not related to any incident.

‍

‍

Claim:

‍

The viral video claims that a recent military strike by Iran resulted in the destruction of parts of Israel, following an initial missile attack launched by Iran. The footage appears current and depicts significant destruction of buildings and widespread chaos in the streets.

‍

FACT CHECK: 

‍

We conducted our research on the viral video to determine if it was AI-generated. During the research we broke the video into individual still frames, and upon closely examining the frames, several of the visuals he showed us had odd-shaped visual features, abnormal body proportions, and flickering movements that don't occur in real footage. We took several still frames and checked them in image search sites to see if they had appeared before. The search results revealed that several clips in the video had appeared previously, in separate and unrelated circumstances, which indicates that they are neither recent nor original.

‍

‍

‍

While examining the Instagram profile, we noticed that the account frequently shares visually dramatic AI content that appears digitally created. Many earlier posts from the same page include scenes that are unrealistic, such as wrecked aircraft in desolate areas or buildings collapsing in unnatural ways. In the current video, for instance, the fighter jets shown have multiple wings, which is not technically or aerodynamically possible in real life. The profile’s bio, which reads "Resistance of Artificial Intelligence," suggests that the page intentionally focuses on sharing AI-generated or fictional content. 

‍

‍

We also ran the viral post through Tenorshare.AI for Deep-Fake detection, and the result came 94% AI. All findings resulting from our research established that the video is synthetic and unrelated to any event occurring in Israel, and therefore debunked a false narrative propagated on social media.

‍

‍

Conclusion: 

Our research found that the video is fake and contains AI-generated images and is not related to any real missile strike or destruction occurring in Israel. The source is specific to fuel the panic and misinformation in a context of already-heightened geopolitical tension. We call on viewers not to share this unverified information and to rely on trusted sources. When there are sensitive international developments, the dissemination of fake imagery can promote fear, confusion, and misinformation on a global scale.

‍

• Claim: Real Footage of Iran’s Missile Strikes on Israel‍
• Claimed On: Social Media‍
• Fact Check: False and Misleading

‍

Introduction

The United Nations (UN) has unveiled a set of principles, known as the 'Global Principles for Information Integrity', to combat the spread of online misinformation, disinformation, and hate speech. These guidelines aim to address the widespread harm caused by false information on digital platforms. The UN's Global Principles are based on five core principles: social trust and resilience, independent, free, and pluralistic media, healthy incentives, transparency and research, and public empowerment. The UN chief emphasized that the threats to information integrity are not new but are now spreading at unprecedented speeds due to digital platforms and artificial intelligence technologies.

These principles aim to enhance global cooperation in order to create a safer online environment. It was further highlighted that the spread of misinformation, disinformation, hate speech, and other risks in the information environment poses threats to democracy, human rights, climate action, and public health. This impact is intensified by the emergence of rapidly advancing Artificial Intelligence Technology (AI tech) that poses a growing threat to vulnerable groups in information environments.

The Highlights of Key Principles

1. Societal Trust and Resilience: Trust in information sources and the ability and resilience to handle disruptions are critical for maintaining information integrity. Both are at risk from state and non-state actors exploiting the information ecosystem.
2. Healthy Incentives: Current business models reliant on targeted advertising threaten information integrity. The complex, opaque nature of digital advertising benefits large tech companies and it requires reforms to ensure transparency and accountability.
3. Public Empowerment: People require the capability to manage their online interactions, the availability of varied and trustworthy information, and the capacity to make informed decisions. Media and digital literacy are crucial, particularly for marginalized populations.
4. Independent, Free, and Pluralistic Media: A free press supports democracy by fostering informed discourse, holding power accountable, and safeguarding human rights. Journalists must operate safely and freely, with access to diverse news sources.
5. Transparency and research: Technology companies must be transparent about how information is propagated and how personal data is used. Research and privacy-preserving data access should be encouraged to address information integrity gaps while protecting those investigating and reporting on these issues.

Stakeholders Called for Action

Stakeholders, including technology companies, AI actors, advertisers, media, researchers, civil society organizations, state and political actors, and the UN, have been called to take action under the UN Global Principles for Information Integrity. These principles should be used to build and participate in broad cross-sector coalitions that bring together diverse expertise from civil society, academia, media, government, and the international private sector, focussing on capacity-building and meaningful youth engagement through dedicated advisory groups. Additionally, collaboration is required to develop multi-stakeholder action plans at regional, national, and local levels, engaging communities in grassroots initiatives and ensuring that youth are fully and meaningfully involved in the process.

Implementation and Monitoring

To effectively implement the UN Global Principles at large requires developing a multi-stakeholder action plan at various levels such as at the regional, national, and local levels. These plans should be informed and created by advice and counsel from an extensive range of communities including any of the grassroots initiatives having a deep understanding of regional challenges and their specific needs. Monitoring and evaluation are also regarded as essential components of the implementation process. Regular assessments of the progress, combined with the flexibility to adapt strategies as needed, will help ensure that the principles are effectively translated into practice.

Challenges and Considerations

Implementing these Global Principles of the UN will have certain challenges. The complexities that the digital landscape faces with the rapid pace of technological revamp, and alterations in the diversity of cultural and political contexts all present significant hurdles. Furthermore, the efforts to combat misinformation must be balanced with protecting fundamental rights, including the right to freedom of expression and privacy. Addressing these challenges to counter informational integrity will require continuous and ongoing collaboration with constant dialogue among stakeholders towards a commitment to innovation and continuous learning. It is also important to recognise and address the power imbalance within the information ecosystem, ensuring that all voices are heard and that any person, specifically, the marginalised communities is not cast aside.

Conclusion

The UN Global Principles for Online Misinformation and Information Integrity provide a comprehensive framework for addressing the critical challenges that are present while facing information integrity today. Advocating and promoting societal trust, healthy incentives, public empowerment, independent media, and transparency, these principles offer a passage towards a more resilient and trustworthy digital environment. The future success of these principles depends upon the collaborative efforts of all stakeholders, working together to safeguard the integrity of information for everyone.

References

• https://www.business-standard.com/world-news/un-unveils-global-principles-to-combat-online-misinformation-hate-speech-124062500317_1.html
• https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2024/06/global-principles-information-integrity-launch/ 
• https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/un-global-principles-for-information-integrity-en.pdf
• https://www.un.org/en/content/common-agenda-report/assets/pdf/Common_Agenda_Report_English.pdf 

‍

Modern international trade heavily relies on data transfers for the exchange of digital goods and services. User data travels across multiple jurisdictions and legal regimes, each with different rules for processing it. Since international treaties and standards for data protection are inadequate, states, in an effort to protect their citizens' data, have begun extending their domestic privacy laws beyond their borders. However, this opens a Pandora's box of legal and administrative complexities for both, the data protection authorities and data processors. The former must balance the harmonization of domestic data protection laws with their extraterritorial enforcement, without overreaching into the sovereignty of other states. The latter must comply with the data privacy laws in all states where it collects, stores, and processes data. While the international legal community continues to grapple with these challenges, India can draw valuable lessons to refine the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP) in a way that effectively addresses these complexities.

Why Extraterritorial Application? 

Since data moves freely across borders and entities collecting such data from users in multiple states can misuse it or use it to gain an unfair competitive advantage in local markets, data privacy laws carry a clause on their extraterritorial application. Thus, this principle is utilized by states to frame laws that can ensure comprehensive data protection for their citizens, irrespective of the data’s location.  The foremost example of this is the European Union’s (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), 2016,  which applies to any entity that processes the personal data of its citizens, regardless of its location. Recently, India has enacted the DPDP Act of 2023, which includes a clause on extraterritorial application.

The Extraterritorial Approach: GDPR and DPDP Act

The GDPR is considered the toughest data privacy law in the world and sets a global standard in data protection. According to Article 3, its provisions apply not only to data processors within the EU but also to those established outside its territory, if they offer goods and services to and conduct behavioural monitoring of data subjects within the EU. The enforcement of this regulation relies on heavy penalties for non-compliance in the form of fines up to €20 million or 4% of the company’s global turnover, whichever is higher, in case of severe violations. As a result, corporations based in the USA, like Meta and Clearview AI, have been fined over  €1.5 billion and €5.5 million respectively, under the GDPR. 

Like the GDPR, the DPDP Act extends its jurisdiction to foreign companies dealing with personal data of data principles within Indian territory under section 3(b). It has a similar extraterritorial reach and prescribes a penalty of up to Rs 250 crores in case of breaches. However, the Act or DPDP Rules, 2025, which are currently under deliberation, do not elaborate on an enforcement mechanism through which foreign companies can be held accountable. 

Lessons for India’s DPDP on Managing Extraterritorial Application 

1. Clarity in Definitions: GDPR clearly defines ‘personal data’, covering direct information such as name and identification number,  indirect identifiers like location data, and, online identifiers that can be used to identify the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural, or social identity of a natural person. It also prohibits revealing special categories of personal data like religious beliefs and biometric data to protect the fundamental rights and freedoms of the subjects. On the other hand, the DPDP Act/ Rules define ‘personal data’ vaguely, leaving a broad scope for Big Tech and ad-tech firms to bypass obligations. 
2. International Cooperation: Compliance is complex for companies due to varying data protection laws in different countries. The success of regulatory measures in such a scenario depends on international cooperation for governing cross-border data flows and enforcement. For DPDP to be effective, India will have to foster cooperation frameworks with other nations. 
3. Adequate Safeguards for Data Transfers: The GDPR regulates data transfers outside the EU via pre-approved legal mechanisms such as standard contractual clauses or binding corporate rules to ensure that the same level of protection applies to EU citizens’ data even when it is processed outside the EU. The DPDP should adopt similar safeguards to ensure that Indian citizens’ data is protected when processed abroad.
4. Revised Penalty Structure: The GDPR mandates a penalty structure that must be effective, proportionate, and dissuasive. The supervisory authority in each member state has the power to impose administrative fines as per these principles, up to an upper limit set by the GDPR. On the other hand, the DPDP’s penalty structure is simplistic and will disproportionately impact smaller businesses. It must take into regard factors such as nature, gravity, and duration of the infringement, its consequences, compliance measures taken, etc.
5. Governance Structure: The GDPR envisages a multi-tiered governance structure comprising of   

• National-level Data Protection Authorities (DPAs) for enforcing national data protection laws and the GDPR, 
• European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) for monitoring the processing of personal data by EU institutions and bodies,  
• European Commission (EC) for developing GDPR legislation
• European Data Protection Board (EDPB) for enabling coordination between the EC, EDPS, and DPAs

In contrast, the Data Protection Board (DPB) under DPDP will be a single, centralized body overseeing compliance and enforcement. Since its members are to be appointed by the Central Government, it raises questions about the Board’s autonomy and ability to apply regulations consistently. Further, its investigative and enforcement capabilities are not well defined.

Conclusion 

The protection of the human right to privacy ( under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) in today’s increasingly interconnected digital economy warrants international standard-setting on cross-border data protection. In the meantime, States relying on the extraterritorial application of domestic laws is unavoidable. While India’s DPDP takes measures towards this, they must be refined to ensure clarity regarding implementation mechanisms. They should push for alignment with data protection laws of other States, and account for the complexity of enforcement in cases involving extraterritorial jurisdiction. As India sets out to position itself as a global digital leader, a well-crafted extraterritorial framework under the DPDP Act will be essential to promote international trust in India’s data governance regime.

Sources

• https://gdpr-info.eu/art-83-gdpr/ 
• https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-150/ 
• https://gdpr-info.eu/recitals/no-51/ 
• https://www.meity.gov.in/static/uploads/2024/06/2bf1f0e9f04e6fb4f8fef35e82c42aa5.pdf 
• https://www.eqs.com/compliance-blog/biggest-gdpr-fines/#:~:text=ease%20the%20burden.-,At%20a%20glance,In%20summary 
• https://gdpr-info.eu/art-3-gdpr/ 
• https://www.legal500.com/developments/thought-leadership/gdpr-v-indias-dpdpa-key-differences-and-compliance-implications/#:~:text=Both%20laws%20cover%20'personal%20data,of%20personal%20data%20as%20sensitive. 

‍