Exclusive Training Kits Boost Esports Players

Misinformation is a scourge in the digital world, making the most mundane experiences fraught with risk. The threat is considerably heightened in conflict settings, especially in the modern era, where geographical borders blur and civilians and conflict actors alike can take to the online realm to discuss -and influence- conflict events. Propaganda can complicate the narrative and distract from the humanitarian crises affecting civilians, while also posing a serious threat to security operations and law and order efforts. Sensationalised reports of casualties and manipulated portrayals of military actions contribute to a cycle of violence and suffering. 

A study conducted by MIT found the mere thought of sharing news on social media reduced the ability to judge whether a story was true or false; the urge to share outweighed the consideration of accuracy (2023).  Cross-border misinformation has become a critical issue in today's interconnected world, driven by the rise of digital communication platforms. To effectively combat misinformation, coordinated international policy frameworks and cooperation between governments, platforms, and global institutions are created.

The Global Nature of Misinformation

Cross-border misinformation is false or misleading information that spreads across countries. Out-of-border creators amplify information through social media and digital platforms and are a key source of misinformation. Misinformation can interfere with elections, and create serious misconceptions about health concerns such as those witnessed during the COVID-19 pandemic, or even lead to military conflicts. 

The primary challenge in countering cross-border misinformation is the difference in national policies, legal frameworks and governance policies of social media platforms across various jurisdictions. Examining the existing international frameworks, such as cybersecurity treaties and data-sharing agreements used for financial crimes might be helpful to effectively address cross-border misinformation. Adapting these approaches to the digital information ecosystem, nations could strengthen their collective response to the spread of misinformation across borders. Global institutions like the United Nations or regional bodies like the EU and ASEAN can work together to set a unified response and uniform international standards for regulation dealing with misinformation specifically. 

Current National and Regional Efforts

Many countries have taken action to deal with misinformation within their borders. Some examples include:

• The EU’s Digital Services Act has been instrumental in regulating online intermediaries and platforms including marketplaces, social networks, content-sharing platforms, app stores, etc. The legislation aims to prevent illegal and harmful activities online and the spread of disinformation.
• The primary legislation that governs cyberspace in India is the IT Act of 2000 and its corresponding rules (IT Rules, 2023), which impose strict requirements on social media platforms to counter misinformation content and enable the traceability of the creator responsible for the origin of misinformation. Platforms have to conduct due diligence, failing which they risk losing their safe harbour protection. The recently-enacted DPDP Act of 2023 indirectly addresses personal data misuse that can be used to contribute to the creation and spread of misinformation. Also, the proposed Digital India Act is expected to focus on “user harms” specific to the online world. 
• In the U.S., the Right to Editorial Discretion and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act place the responsibility for regulating misinformation on private actors like social media platforms and social media regulations. The US government has not created a specific framework addressing misinformation and has rather encouraged voluntary measures by SMPs to have independent policies to regulate misinformation on their platforms.

The common gap area across these policies is the absence of a standardised, global framework for addressing cross-border misinformation which results in uneven enforcement and dependence on national regulations.

Key Challenges in Achieving International Cooperation

Some of the key challenges identified in achieving international cooperation to address cross-border misinformation are as follows:

• Geopolitical tensions can emerge due to the differences in political systems, priorities, and trust issues between countries that hinder attempts to cooperate and create a universal regulation.
• The diversity in approaches to internet governance and freedom of speech across countries complicates the matters further.
• Further complications arise due to technical and legal obstacles around the issues of sovereignty, jurisdiction and enforcement, further complicating matters relating to the monitoring and removal of cross-border misinformation. 

CyberPeace Recommendations 

• The UN Global Principles For Information Integrity Recommendations for Multi-stakeholder Action, unveiled on 24 June 2024, are a welcome step for addressing cross-border misinformation. This can act as the stepping stone for developing a framework for international cooperation on misinformation, drawing inspiration from other successful models like climate change agreements, international criminal law framework etc. 
• Collaborations like public-private partnerships between government, tech companies and civil societies can help enhance transparency, data sharing and accountability in tackling cross-border misinformation. 
• Engaging in capacity building and technology transfers in less developed countries would help to create a global front against misinformation. 

Conclusion

We are in an era where misinformation knows no borders and the need for international cooperation has never been more urgent. Global democracies are exploring solutions, both regulatory and legislative, to limit the spread of misinformation, however, these fragmented efforts fall short of addressing the global scale of the problem. Establishing a standardised, international framework, backed by multilateral bodies like the UN and regional alliances, can foster accountability and facilitate shared resources in this fight. Through collaborative action, transparent regulations, and support for developing nations, the world can create a united front to curb misinformation and protect democratic values, ensuring information integrity across borders.

References

• https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2023-10/A%20Model%20of%20Online%20Misinformation.pdf 
• https://www.indiatoday.in/global/story/in-the-crosshairs-manufacturing-consent-and-the-erosion-of-public-trust-2620734-2024-10-21 
• https://laweconcenter.org/resources/knowledge-and-decisions-in-the-information-age-the-law-economics-of-regulating-misinformation-on-social-media-platforms/ ‍
• https://www.article19.org/resources/un-article-19-global-principles-for-information-integrity/

Introduction

Intricate and winding are the passageways of the modern digital age, a place where the reverberations of truth effortlessly blend, yet hauntingly contrast, with the echoes of falsehood. Within this complex realm, the World Economic Forum (WEF) has illuminated the darkened corners with its powerful spotlight, revealing the festering, insidious network of misinformation and disinformation that snakes through the virtual and physical worlds alike. Gravely identified by the “WEF's Global Risks Report 2024” as the most formidable and immediate threats to our collective well-being, this malignant duo—misinformation and disinformation. 

The report published with the solemn tone suitable for the prelude to such a grand international gathering as the Annual Summit in Davos, the report presents a vivid tableau of our shared global landscape—one that is dominated by the treacherous pitfalls of deceits and unverified claims. These perils, if unrecognised and unchecked by societal checks and balances, possess the force to rip apart the intricate tapestry of our liberal institutions, shaking the pillars of democracies and endangering the vulnerable fabric of social cohesion.

Election Mania 

As we find ourselves perched on the edge of a future, one where the voices of nearly three billion human beings make their mark on the annals of history—within the varied electoral processes of nations such as Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Pakistan, the United Kingdom, and the United States. However, the spectre of misinformation can potentially corrode the integrity of the governing entities that will emerge from these democratic processes. The warning issued by the WEF is unambiguous: we are flirting with the possibility of disorder and turmoil, where the unchecked dispersion of fabrications and lies could kindle flames of unrest, manifesting in violent protests, hate-driven crimes, civil unrest, and the scourge of terrorism.

Derived from the collective wisdom of over 1,400 experts in global risk, esteemed policymakers, and industry leaders, the report crafts a sobering depiction of our world's journey. It paints an ominous future that increasingly endows governments with formidable power—to brandish the weapon of censorship, to unilaterally declare what is deemed 'true' and what ought to be obscured or eliminated in the virtual world of sharing information. This trend signals a looming potential for wider and more comprehensive repression, hindering the freedoms traditionally associated with the Internet, journalism, and unhindered access to a panoply of information sources—vital fora for the exchange of ideas and knowledge in a myriad of countries across the globe.

Prominence of AI 

When the gaze of the report extends further over a decade-long horizon, the prominence of environmental challenges such as the erosion of biodiversity and alarming shifts in the Earth's life-support systems ascend to the pinnacle of concern. Yet, trailing closely, the digital risks continue to pulsate—perpetuated by the distortions of misinformation, the echoing falsities of disinformation, and the unpredictable repercussions stemming from the utilization and, at times, the malevolent deployment of artificial intelligence (AI). These ethereal digital entities, far from being illusory shades, are the precursors of a disintegrating world order, a stage on which regional powers move to assert and maintain their influence, instituting their own unique standards and norms.

The prophecies set forth by the WEF should not be dismissed as mere academic conjecture; they are instead a trumpet's urgent call to mobilize. With a startling 30 percent of surveyed global experts bracing for the prospect of international calamities within the mere span of the coming two years, and an even more significant portion—nearly two-thirds—envisaging such crises within the forthcoming decade, it is unmistakable that the time to confront and tackle these looming risks is now. The clarion is sounding, and the message is clear: inaction is no longer an available luxury.

Maldives and India Row

To pluck precise examples from the boundless field of misinformation, we might observe the Lakshadweep-Malé incident wherein an ordinary boat accident off the coast of Kerala was grotesquely transformed into a vessel for the far-reaching tendrils of fabricated narratives, erroneously implicating Lakshadweep in the spectacle. Similarly, the tension-laden India-Maldives diplomatic exchange becomes a harrowing testament to how strained international relations may become fertile ground for the rampant spread of misleading content. The suspension of Maldivian deputy ministers following offensive remarks, the immediate tumult that followed on social media, and the explosive proliferation of counterfeit news targeting both nations paint a stark and intricate picture of how intertwined are the threads of politics, the digital platforms of social media, and the virulent propagation of falsehoods.

Yet, these are mere fragments within the extensive and elaborate weave of misinformation that threatens to enmesh our globe. As we venture forth into this dangerous and murky topography, it becomes our collective responsibility to maintain a sense of heightened vigilance, to consistently question and verify the sources and content of the information that assails us from all directions, and to cultivate an enduring culture anchored in critical thinking and discernment. The stakes are colossal—for it is not merely truth itself that we defend, but rather the underlying tenets of our societies and the sanctity of our cherished democratic institutions.

Conclusion 

In this fraught era, marked indelibly by uncertainty and perched precariously on the cusp of numerous pivotal electoral ventures, let us refuse the role of passive bystanders to unraveling our collective reality. We must embrace our role as active participants in the relentless pursuit of truth, fortified with the stark awareness that our entwined futures rest precariously on our willingness and ability to distinguish the veritable from the spurious within the perilous lattice of falsehoods of misinformation. We must continually remind ourselves that, in the quest for a stable and just global order, the unerring discernment of fact from fiction becomes not only an act of intellectual integrity but a deed of civic and moral imperative.

References 

• https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/world/election-fuelled-misinformation-is-serious-global-risk-in-2024-says-wef/articleshow/106727033.cms
• https://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/current-affairs/100124/misinformation-tops-global-risks-2024.html
• https://www.msn.com/en-in/news/India/fact-check-in-lakshadweep-male-row-kerala-boat-accident-becomes-vessel-for-fake-news/ar-AA1mOJqY
• https://www.boomlive.in/news/india-maldives-muizzu-pm-modi-lakshadweep-fact-check-24085
• https://www.weforum.org/press/2024/01/global-risks-report-2024-press-release/

Introduction

Personalised advertisements deploy a mechanism that derives from the collection of the user’s data. Although it allows for a more tailored user experience, one cannot ignore the method through which this is achieved. Recently, as per a report by the Indian Express on 13th November 2024, Meta has come up with a less personalised ad option on Facebook and Instagram for its users in the European Union (EU). This was done due to the incompatibility of their previous ad offer with the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA). 

Relevant Legislation

In October 2023, Meta came up with a “Pay or Consent” option for their users in the EU. It gave the users two options: either to pay a monthly subscription fee to avail of the ad-free usage variant of Facebook and Instagram, or to give consent to see personalised ads based on the user’s data. This consent model was introduced in their attempts to comply with the EU’s DMA. However, this was found to be incompatible with the said mandate, according to the EU regulators, as they believed that the users should not only have the option to consent to ads but also have access to less personalised but equivalent alternatives. It is this decision that pushed Meta to come up with less personalised ad options for users in the EU. The less-personalised ad option claims to rely on limited data and show ads that are only based on the context of what is being viewed i.e. during a Facebook or Instagram session requiring a minimum set of data points such as location, age, gender, and the user’s engagement with the ads. However, choosing this option also allows for such ads to be less skippable. 

The EU’s Digital Markets Act came into force on November 1, 2022. The purpose was to make the digital marketing sector fairer and in doing so, identify what they consider to be “Gatekeepers” (core platform services such as messenger services, search engines, and app stores) and a list of do’s and don’ts for them. One of them, applicable to the case mentioned above, is the effective consent required by the user in case the gatekeeper decides to target advertisements enabled by tracking the users' activity outside the gatekeeper's core platform services. 

The Indian Context

Although no such issues have been raised in India yet, it is imperative to know that in the Indian context, the DPDP (Digital Personal Data Protection) Act 2023 governs personal data regulation. This includes rules for Data Fiduciaries (those who, alone or in partnership with others, determine the means and purpose of processing personal data), the Data Principal (those who give data), Consent Managers, and even rules regarding processing data of children. 

CyberPeace Recommendations:

At the level of the user, one can take steps to ensure limited collection of personal data by following the mentioned steps: 

• Review Privacy Settings- Reviewing Privacy settings for one’s online accounts and devices is a healthy practice to avoid giving unnecessary information to third-party applications.
• Private Browsing- Browsing through private mode or incognito is encouraged, as it prevents websites from tracking your activity and personal data.
• Using Ad-blockers- Certain websites have a user option to block ads when the user first visits their page. Availing of this prevents spam advertisements from the respective websites.
• Using VPN- Using Virtual Private Networks enables users to hide their IP address and their data to be encrypted, preventing third-party actors from tracking the users' online activities
• Other steps include clearing cookies and cache data and using the location-sharing feature with care.

Conclusion

Meta’s compliance with the EU’s DMA signals that social media platforms cannot circumnavigate their way around rules. Balancing the services provided while respecting user privacy is of the utmost importance. The EU has set precedence for a system that respects this and can be used as an example to help set guidelines for how other countries can continue to deal with similar issues and set standards accordingly.

References

• https://indianexpress.com/article/technology/tech-news-technology/meta-less-personalised-ads-eu-regulatory-demands-9667266/
• https://rainmaker.co.in/blog/view/the-price-of-personalization-how-targeted-advertising-breaches-data-privacy-and-challenges-the-gdprs-shield
• https://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/magazine-features/fines-data-protection-violations/
• https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbestechcouncil/2023/09/01/the-landscape-of-personalized-advertising-efficiency-versus-privacy/
• https://iapp.org/news/a/pay-or-consent-personalized-ads-the-rules-and-whats-next
• https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/how-to/how-to-safeguard-privacy-in-the-era-of-personalised-ads/articleshow/102748711.cms?from=mdr
• https://www.business-standard.com/technology/tech-news/facebook-instagram-users-in-europe-can-opt-for-less-personalised-ads-124111201558_1.html
• https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/about-dma_en

‍