#FactCheck - Viral Video Misleadingly Tied to Recent Taiwan Earthquake
Executive Summary:
In the context of the recent earthquake in Taiwan, a video has gone viral and is being spread on social media claiming that the video was taken during the recent earthquake that occurred in Taiwan. However, fact checking reveals it to be an old video. The video is from September 2022, when Taiwan had another earthquake of magnitude 7.2. It is clear that the reversed image search and comparison with old videos has established the fact that the viral video is from the 2022 earthquake and not the recent 2024-event. Several news outlets had covered the 2022 incident, mentioning additional confirmation of the video's origin.
Claims:
There is a news circulating on social media about the earthquake in Taiwan and Japan recently. There is a post on “X” stating that,
“BREAKING NEWS :
Horrific #earthquake of 7.4 magnitude hit #Taiwan and #Japan. There is an alert that #Tsunami might hit them soon”.
Similar Posts:
Fact Check:
We started our investigation by watching the videos thoroughly. We divided the video into frames. Subsequently, we performed reverse search on the images and it took us to an X (formally Twitter) post where a user posted the same viral video on Sept 18, 2022. Worth to notice, the post has the caption-
“#Tsunami warnings issued after Taiwan quake. #Taiwan #Earthquake #TaiwanEarthquake”
The same viral video was posted on several news media in September 2022.
The viral video was also shared on September 18, 2022 on NDTV News channel as shown below.
Conclusion:
To conclude, the viral video that claims to depict the 2024 Taiwan earthquake was from September 2022. In the course of the rigorous inspection of the old proof and the new evidence, it has become clear that the video does not refer to the recent earthquake that took place as stated. Hence, the recent viral video is misleading . It is important to validate the information before sharing it on social media to prevent the spread of misinformation.
Claim: Video circulating on social media captures the recent 2024 earthquake in Taiwan.
Claimed on: X, Facebook, YouTube
Fact Check: Fake & Misleading, the video actually refers to an incident from 2022.
Related Blogs
Introduction
Artificial intelligence is often hailed as a democratiser of knowledge, opportunity and skill. It is set to improve diagnostics, personalised learning, and productivity to boost the economy, which can assist millions of people to leave poverty. However, this may be an incomplete picture. A report of the United Nations Development Programme in 2025 tells a more complex tale. The Next Great Divergence: Why AI May Widen Inequality Between Countries cautions that, unless acts are taken to intervene, AI will not alleviate inequality between countries but will instead concentrate benefits in already advantaged economies and increase risks in more vulnerable ones.
Two Gaps, One Crisis
AI is not going to create a level playing field: it has been injected into a world where there is unprecedented inequality. The report outlines two structural asymmetries that will influence the ways in which its effects manifest: a capability gap and a vulnerability gap.
Those countries that have high connectivity, skills, compute and regulation will be in a position to reap a greater portion of the AI dividend. Others will be exposed to greater risks of job losses, information exclusion, misinformation, and the indirect consequences of increased energy and water demands.
The centre of this transition is the Asia-Pacific region, that harbors a population of more than 55 per cent of the world. More than half of the global AI users are now located in the region, but the initial positions are quite different. Nations such as Singapore and South Korea are already spending a lot of money on AI infrastructure, with others still striving to offer basic broadband services. Two out of three individuals already use AI tools in certain high-income economies. In most countries with low incomes, the utilisation is lower. Such figures are important as they depict not only a gap in technology but also a structural difference in terms of who controls AI and who is controlled by the latter.
When Inequality Becomes a Trust Problem
Any trusted technological system is based on three tenets: transparency, fairness and accountability. AI inequality negatively impacts all three.
If governments implement imported AI systems in areas with limited technical capability, with limited transparency on their operation, their construction, and their biases. Citizens do not really trust when decision-making systems are black boxes and domestic institutions lack the know-how to question them.
Data exclusion also interferes with fairness. The AI systems trained with the datasets not sufficiently representative of the rural population, linguistic minorities, and women will generate poorer results in those groups systematically. Since South Asian women are much less likely to own a smartphone, this impacts their representation in digital data, and consequently in any AI system trained on such data.
Safety Risks Are Not Evenly Distributed
The lack of trust has a direct safety aspect. For example, those countries that have less robust information ecosystems have a greater exposure to AI-generated misinformation that can bias the discourse of the populace, alter elections, and cause violence. They also have the weakest capability of screening, tagging, or combating such content.
The same can be said about labour markets. The very same technologies that can speed up marginalisation and destabilise governance increase human insecurity, especially among employees in the informal economy with weak social security. The UNDP report points out that the exposure of female employment to disruption by AI is disproportionate to that of male employment, which further presents a gendered dimension in an already unequal situation.
Risks of infrastructure are skewed as well. Large AI systems may create disproportionately high energy and water demands on countries that host the data infrastructure without there being an equivalent economic payback. The environmental cost is local while profits are outsourced. Dangers of AI spread downwards, and the advantages go upwards.
The Governance Gap and Regulatory Arbitrage
Governance is perhaps the most important aspect. There are only a few states that presently have extensive AI regulation systems. This gives rise to a patchy landscape, in which safety standards differ dramatically and where companies have an incentive to install systems in jurisdictions that have weaker regulation.
The main reason is the lack of capability, as expressed by Philip Schellekens, chief economist of the UNDP in Asia and the Pacific, who says that those countries that invest in skills, computing power and well-run governance structures will gain. The rest will be left far behind.
This departure has its ramifications outside the nations. When users in other areas are subjected to widely different rates of safety and equity by the same international platforms, the concept of uniform digital norms would no longer be sustainable. Confidence in AI systems is lost not only locally but also on a global scale.
Way Forward
The UNDP report makes it clear that there is no inevitability of divergence. To avert it, however, it is necessary to consider AI governance as a development, rather than a technology problem.
The capacity to govern should be constructed and not presumed. This implies assisting countries in establishing regulatory systems, institutional capacity, and facilitating cross-border collaboration on standards. It can also imply considering some AI features as a public good, with common models and open standards that do not allow a few firms or states to become too powerful.
The UNDP articulates the problem in a simple manner: in the end, the world's people and not machines must decide on what technologies should be given priority and how to utilise them optimally.
Conclusion
AI inequality is often framed as an economic divergence story. But its implications run deeper. It reshapes who is protected, who is visible in data, and who has the power to challenge harmful outcomes. The risk is not just that some countries fall behind economically. It is that the global digital ecosystem fragments into zones of high trust and low trust, high protection and low protection. The choices made now will determine which path prevails. AI can reinforce existing divides or help bridge them.
But that outcome will not be decided by the technology itself. It will be decided by how societies choose to distribute access, power, and responsibility in the systems they build.
References
- https://www.undp.org/sites/g/files/zskgke326/files/2025-12/undp-rbap-the-next-great-divergence_1.pdf
- https://www.undp.org/asia-pacific/press-releases/ai-risks-sparking-new-era-divergence-development-gaps-between-countries-widen-undp-report-finds
- https://www.undp.org/asia-pacific/blog/next-great-divergence-how-ai-could-split-world-again-if-we-dont-intervene
- https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/12/2/ai-threatens-to-widen-inequality-among-states-un
- https://www.undp.org/asia-pacific/next-great-divergence
- https://www.eco-business.com/press-releases/ai-risks-spark-new-era-of-divergence-as-development-gaps-widen-undp-report/
Introduction
In today’s digital age, everyone is online, so is the healthcare sector worldwide. The latest victim of a data breach is Hong Kong healthcare provider OT&P Healthcare, which has recently suffered a data loss of 100,000 patients that exposed their medical history, and caused concern to the patients and their families. This breach has highlighted the vulnerability in the healthcare sector /industry and the importance of cybersecurity measures to protect sensitive information. This blog will explore the data breach, its impact on patients and families, and the best practices for safeguarding sensitive data.
Background: On 13 March 2023, an incident took place where the Cybercriminals deployed a variety of methods to breach the data, which included phishing attacks, malware, and exploiting software vulnerabilities. OT&P Health Care exploits the sensitive data of the patients. According to OT&P Healthcare, it is working together with law enforcement and has hired a cybersecurity firm to investigate the incident and tighten its security procedures. Like other data breaches, the inquiry will most certainly take some time to uncover the actual source and scope of the intrusion. Regardless of the cause of the breach, this event emphasises the significance of frequent cybersecurity assessments, vulnerability testing, and proactive data protection measures. Considering the dangers in the healthcare sector must be cautious in preserving the personal and medical records of the patients as they are sensitive in nature.
Is confidentiality at stake due to data breaches?
Medical data breaches represent a huge danger to patients, with serious ramifications for their privacy, financial security, and physical health. Some of the potential hazards and effects of medical data breaches are as follows:
- Compromise of patient data: Medical data breaches can expose patients’ sensitive information, such as their medical history, diagnoses, treatment, and medication regimens. If history is highly personal and reaches the wrong hands, it could harm someone’s reputation.
- Identity theft: the data stolen by the cybercriminals may be used by them to open credit accounts and apply for loans, Patients can suffer severe financial and psychological stress because of identity theft since they may spend years attempting to rebuild their credit and regain their good name.
- Medical Fraud: Medical data breaches can also result in medical fraud, which occurs when hackers use stolen medical information to charge insurance companies for services that were not performed or for bogus treatments or procedures. Medical fraud may result in financial losses for patients, insurance companies, and individuals obtaining ineffective or risky medical care.
Impact on patients
Data breach does not cause financial loss but may also profoundly impact their mental health and emotional well-being. let’s understand some psychological impacts:
- Anxiety and Stress: Patients whose medical data has been affected may experience feelings of stress and anxiety as they worry about the potential consequences of the data loss can be misused.
- Loss of faith: Patients may lose faith in their healthcare providers if they believe their personal and medical information needs to be properly As a result, patients may be reluctant to disclose sensitive information to their healthcare professionals, compromising the quality of their medical care.
- Sense of Embarrassment: Patients may feel disregarded or ashamed if their sensitive medical information is revealed, particularly if it relates to a sensitive or stigmatised This might lead to social isolation and a reluctance to seek further medical treatment.
- Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD): Patients who have experienced a data breach may have PTSD symptoms such as nightmares, flashbacks, and avoidance behaviour. This can have long-term consequences for their mental health and quality of life.
Legal Implications of Data Breach
Patients have certain legal rights and compensations when a healthcare data breach occurs. Let’s have a look at them: –
- Legal Liability: Healthcare providers have a legal obligation to protect data under various privacy and security laws if they fail to take appropriate measures to protect patient data, they may be held legally liable for resulting harm.
- Legal recourse: Patients whose healthcare data leak has impacted them have the legal right to seek compensation and hold healthcare providers and organisations This could involve suing the healthcare practitioner or organisationresponsible for the breach.
- Right to seek compensation: the patients who have suffered from the data loss are liable to seek compensation.
- Notifications: As soon as a data breach takes place, it impacts the organisation and its customers. In this case, it is the responsibility of the OT&P to
- notify their patients about the data breach and inform them about the consequences.
- Take Away from OT &P Healthcare Data Breach: with the growing data breaches in the healthcare industry, here are some lessons that can be learned from the Hong Kong data breach.
- Cybersecurity: The OT&P Healthcare data breach points to the vital need to prioritisecybersecurity in healthcare. To secure themselves, hospitals and the healthcare sector must use the latest software to protect their data.
- Regular risk assessments: These assessments help find system vulnerabilities and security issues. This can assist healthcare providers and organisationsin taking the necessary actions to avoid data breaches and boost their cybersecurity defences.
- Staff Training: Healthcare workers should be taught cybersecurity best practices, such as detecting and responding to phishing attempts, handling sensitive data, and reporting suspected security breaches. This training should be continued to keep workers updated on the newest cybersecurity trends and threats.
- Incident Response Strategy: Healthcare providers and organisations should have an incident response policy in place to deal with data breaches and other security concerns. This strategy should include protocols for reporting instances, limiting the breach, and alerting patients and verified authorities.
Conclusion
The recent data breach in Hong Kong healthcare impact not only the patients but also their trust is shaken. As we continue to rely on digital technology for medical records and healthcare delivery, it is essential that healthcare providers and organisations take proactive steps to protect patient data from cyber-attacks and data breaches.
References
Executive Summary
An image of a banknote featuring Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei is going viral on social media, with claims that Iran’s central bank has issued a newly designed 5 million rial note bearing his portrait. However, a fact-check by the CyberPeace Research Wing has found the claim to be misleading.
Claim
The image was shared by a verified user, “Sprinter Press Agency,” on X (formerly Twitter), claiming that the Central Bank had introduced a new banknote design featuring the leader of the Islamic Revolution.
Fact Check
To verify the claim, relevant keywords were searched across multiple credible sources. No reports were found from any reputable international media outlet, Iranian government platform, or the Central Bank of Iran confirming the release of such a banknote. A technical analysis of the viral image was also conducted. According to the AI detection tool Zhuque AI Detection Assistant, there is a 63.8% probability that the image is AI-generated, raising further doubts about its authenticity.
Conclusion:
The claim that Iran’s central bank has issued a new 5 million rial banknote featuring Ayatollah Khamenei is misleading. There is no official confirmation of such a release, and available evidence suggests that the viral image is either edited or AI-generated.
