#FactCheck -Digitally Altered MEA Briefing Video Falsely Attributes AI-Generated Remarks on Quad and India–US Relations

Executive Summary:

A misleading video has been widely shared online, falsely portraying Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru stating that he was not involved in the Indian independence struggle and he even opposed it. The video is a manipulated excerpt from Pandit Nehru’s final major interview in 1964 with American TV host Arnold Mich. The original footage available on India’s state broadcaster Prasar Bharati’s YouTube channel shows Pandit Nehru discussing about Muhammad Ali Jinnah, stating that Jinnah did not participate in the independence movement and opposed it. The viral video falsely edits Pandit Nehru’s comments to create a false narrative, which has been debunked upon reviewing the full, unedited interview.

Claims:

In the viral video, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru states that he was not involved in the fight for Indian independence and even opposed it.

‍

‍

Fact check:

Upon receiving the posts, we thoroughly checked the video and then we divided the video into keyframes using the inVid tool. We reverse-searched one of the frames of the video. We found a video uploaded by Prasar Bharati Archives official YouTube channel on 14 May 2019.

The description of the video reads, “Full video recording of what was perhaps Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's last significant interview to American TV Host Arnold Mich Jawaharlal Nehru's last TV Interview - May 1964e his death. Another book by Chandrika Prasad provides a date of 18th May 1964  when the interview was aired in New York, this is barely a few days before the death of Pandit Nehru on 27th May 1964.”

On reviewing the full video, we found that the viral clip of Pandit Nehru runs from 14:50 to 15:45. In this portion, Pandit Nehru is speaking about Muhammad Ali Jinnah, a key leader of the Muslim League.

At the timestamp 14:34, the American TV interviewer Arnold Mich says, “You and Mr. Gandhi and Mr. Jinnah, you were all involved at that point of Independence and then partition in the fight for Independence of India from the British domination.” Pandit Nehru replied, “Mr. Jinnah was not involved in the fight for independence at all. In fact, he opposed it. Muslim League was started in about 1911 I think. It was started really by the British encouraged by them so as to create factions, they did succeed to some extent. And ultimately there came the partition.” 

Upon thoroughly analyzing we found that the viral video is an edited version of the real video to misrepresent the actual context of the video.

We also found the same interview uploaded on a Facebook page named Nehru Centre for Social Research on 1 December 2021.

Hence, the viral claim video is misleading and fake.

Hence, the viral video is fake and misleading and netizens must be careful while believing in such an edited video.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the viral video claiming that Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru stated that he was not involved in the Indian independence struggle is found to be falsely edited. The original footage reveals that Pandit Nehru was referring to Muhammad Ali Jinnah's participation in the struggle, not his own. This explanation debunks the false story conveyed by the manipulated video.

• Claim:  Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru stated that he was not involved in the struggle for Indian independence and even he opposed it.
• Claimed on: YouTube, LinkedIn, Facebook, X (Formerly known as Twitter)
• Fact Check: Fake & Misleading

‍

Introduction

The role of ‘Small and Medium Enterprises’ (SMEs) in the economic and social development of the country is well established. The SME sector is often driven by individual creativity and innovation. With its contribution at  8% of the country’s GDP, and 45% of the manufactured output and 40% of its exports, SMEs provide employment to about 60 million persons through over 26 million enterprises producing over six thousand products. 

It would be an understatement to say that the SMEs sector in India is highly heterogeneous in terms of the size of the enterprises, variety of products and services produced and the levels of technology employed. With the SME sector booming across the country, these enterprises are contributing significantly to local, state, regional and national growth and feeding into India’s objectives of inclusive, sustainable development. 

As the digital economy expands, SMEs cannot be left behind and must integrate online to be able to grow and prosper. This development is not without its risks and cybersecurity concerns and digital threats like misinformation are fast becoming a pressing pain point for the SME sector. The unique challenge posed to SMEs by cyber threats is that while the negative consequences of digital risks are just as damaging for the SMEs as they are for larger industries, the former’s ability to counter these threats is not at par with the latter, owing to the limited nature of resources at their disposal. The rapid development of emerging technologies like artificial intelligence makes it easier for malicious actors to develop bots, deepfakes, or other forms of manipulated content that can steer customers away from small businesses and the consequences can be devastating. 

Misinformation is the sharing of inaccurate and misleading information, and the act can be both deliberate and unintentional. Malicious actors can use fake reviews, rumours, or false images to promote negative content or create backlash against a business’ brand and reputation. For a fledgling or growing enterprise, its credibility is a critical asset and any threat to the same is as much a cause for concern as any other operational hindrance. 

Relationship Building to Counter Misinformation

We live in a world that is dominated by brands. A brand should ideally inspire trust. It is the single most powerful and unifying characteristic that embodies an organisation's culture and values and once well-established, can create incremental value. Businesses report industry rumours where misinformation resulted in the devaluation of a product, sowing mistrust among customers, and negatively impacting the companies’ revenue. Mitigating strategies to counter these digital downsides can include implementing greater due diligence and basic cyber hygiene practices, like two-factor or multi-factor authentication, as well as open communication of one’s experiences in the larger professional and business networks. 

The loss of customer trust can be fatal for a business, and for an SME, the access to the scale of digital and other resources required to restore reputations may simply not be a feasible option. Creating your brand story is not just the selling pitch you give to customers and investors, but is also about larger qualitative factors such as your own motivation for starting the enterprise or the emotional connection your audience base enjoys with your organisation. The brand story is a mosaic of multiple tangible and intangible elements that all come together to determine how the brand is perceived by its various stakeholders. Building a compelling and fortified brand story which resonates deeply with people is an important step in developing a robust reputation. It can help innoculate against several degrees of misinformation and malicious attempts and ensure that customers continue to place their faith in the brand despite attempts to hurt this dynamic.

Engaging with the target audience, ie, the customer base is part of an effective marketing tool and misinformation inoculation strategy. SMEs should also continuously assess their strategies, adapt to market changes, and remain agile in their approach to stay competitive and relevant in today's dynamic business environment. These strategies will lead to greater customer engagement through the means of feedback, reviews and surveys which help in building trust and loyalty. Innovative and dynamic customer service engages the target audience and helps in staying in the competition and being relevant.

Crisis Management and Response

Having a crisis management strategy is an important practice for all SMEs and should be mandated for better policy implementation. Businesses need greater due diligence and basic cyber hygiene practices, like two-factor authentication, essential compliances, strong password protocols, transparent disclosure, etc. 

The following steps should form part of a crisis management and response strategy:

• Assessing the damage by identifying the misinformation spread and its impact is the first step.  
• Issuing a response in the form of a public statement by engaging the media should precede legal action. 
• Two levels of communication need to take place in response to a misinformation attack. The first tier is internal, to the employees and it should clarify the implications of the incident and the organisation’s response plan. The other is aimed at customers via direct outreach to clarify the situation and provide accurate information in regard to the matter.  If required the employees can be provided training related to the handling of the customer enquiries regarding the misinformation.
• The digital engagement of the enterprise should be promptly updated and social media platforms and online communications must address the issue and provide clarity and factual information. 
• Immediate action must include a plan to rebuild reputations and trust by ensuring customers of the high quality of products and services. The management should seek customer feedback and show commitment to improving processes and transparency. Sharing positive testimonials and stories of satisfied customers can also help at this stage. 
• Engaging with the community and collaborating with organisations is also an important part of crisis management.

While these steps are for rebuilding and crisis management, further steps also need to be taken:

• Monitoring customer sentiment and gauging the effectiveness of the efforts taken is also necessary. And if required, strategic adjustments can be made in response to the evolving circumstances. 
• Depending on the severity of the impact, management may choose to engage the professional help of PR consultants and crisis management experts to develop comprehensive recovery plans and help navigate the situation.
• A long-term strategy which focuses on building resilience against future attacks is important. Along with this, engaging in transparency and proactive communication with stakeholders is a must.

Legal and Ethical Considerations

SMEs administrators must prioritise ethical market practices and appreciate that SMEs are subject to laws which deal with defamation, intellectual property rights- trademark and copyright infringement in particular, data protection and privacy laws and consumer protection laws. Having the knowledge of these laws and ensuring that there is no infringement upon the rights of other enterprises or their consumers is integral in order to continue engaging in business legally. 

Ethical and transparent business conduct includes clear and honest communication and proactive public redressal mechanisms in the event of misinformation or mistakes. These efforts go a long way towards building trust and accountability. 

Proactive public engagement is an important step in building relationships. SMEs can engage with the community where they conduct their business through outreach programs and social media engagement. Efforts to counter misinformation through public education campaigns that alert customers and other stakeholders about misinformation serve the dual purpose of countering misinformation and creating deep community ties. SME administrators should monitor content and developments in their markets and sectors to ensure that their marketing practices are ethical and not creating or spreading misinformation, be it in the form of active sensationalising of existing content or passive dissemination of misinformation created by others. Fact-checking tools and expert consultations can help address and prevent a myriad of problems and should be incorporated into everyday operations.

Conclusion

Developing strong cybersecurity protocols, practising basic digital hygiene and ensuring regulatory compliances are crucial to ensure that a business not only survives but also thrives. Therefore, a crisis management plan and trust-building along with ethical business and legal practices go a long way in ensuring the future of SMEs.  In today's digital landscape, misinformation is pervasive, and trust has become a cornerstone of successful business operations. It is the bedrock of a resilient and successful SME. By implementing and continuously improving trust-building efforts, businesses can not only navigate the challenges of misinformation but also create lasting value for their customers and stakeholders. Prioritising trust ensures long-term growth and sustainability in an ever-evolving digital landscape.

References 

• https://SME.gov.in/sites/default/files/SME-Strategic-Action-Plan.pdf 
• https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2024/01/countering-disinformation-effectively-an-evidence-based-policy-guide?lang=en 
• https://dcSME.gov.in/Report%20of%20Expert%20Committee%20on%20SMEs%20-%20The%20U%20K%20Sinha%20Committee%20constitutes%20by%20RBI.pdf 

‍

The World Economic Forum reported that AI-generated misinformation and disinformation are the second most likely threat to present a material crisis on a global scale in 2024 at 53% (Sept. 2023). Artificial intelligence is automating the creation of fake news at a rate disproportionate to its fact-checking. It is spurring an explosion of web content mimicking factual articles that instead disseminate false information about grave themes such as elections, wars and natural disasters. 

According to a report by the Centre for the Study of Democratic Institutions, a Canadian think tank, the most prevalent effect of Generative AI is the ability to flood the information ecosystem with misleading and factually-incorrect content. As reported by Democracy Reporting International during the 2024 elections of the European Union, Google's Gemini, OpenAI’s ChatGPT 3.5 and 4.0, and Microsoft’s AI interface ‘CoPilot’ were inaccurate one-third of the time when engaged for any queries regarding the election data.   Therefore, a need for an innovative regulatory approach like regulatory sandboxes which can address these challenges while encouraging responsible AI innovation is desired.

What Is AI-driven Misinformation?

False or misleading information created, amplified, or spread using artificial intelligence technologies is AI-driven misinformation. Machine learning models are leveraged to automate and scale the creation of false and deceptive content. Some examples are deep fakes, AI-generated news articles, and bots that amplify false narratives on social media.

The biggest challenge is in the detection and management of AI-driven misinformation. It is difficult to distinguish AI-generated content from authentic content, especially as these technologies advance rapidly. 

AI-driven misinformation can influence elections, public health, and social stability by spreading false or misleading information. While public adoption of the technology has undoubtedly been rapid, it is yet to achieve true acceptance and actually fulfill its potential in a positive manner because there is widespread cynicism about the technology - and rightly so. The general public sentiment about AI is laced with concern and doubt regarding the technology’s trustworthiness, mainly due to the absence of a regulatory framework maturing on par with the technological development. 

Regulatory Sandboxes: An Overview

Regulatory sandboxes refer to regulatory tools that allow businesses to test and experiment with innovative products, services or businesses under the supervision of a regulator for a limited period. They engage by creating a controlled environment where regulators allow businesses to test new technologies or business models with relaxed regulations.

Regulatory sandboxes have been in use for many industries and the most recent example is their use in sectors like fintech, such as the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority sandbox. These models have been known to encourage innovation while allowing regulators to understand emerging risks. Lessons from the fintech sector show that the benefits of regulatory sandboxes include facilitating firm financing and market entry and increasing speed-to-market by reducing administrative and transaction costs. For regulators, testing in sandboxes informs policy-making and regulatory processes. Looking at the success in the fintech industry, regulatory sandboxes could be adapted to AI, particularly for overseeing technologies that have the potential to generate or spread misinformation.

The Role of Regulatory Sandboxes in Addressing AI Misinformation

Regulatory sandboxes can be used to test AI tools designed to identify or flag misinformation without the risks associated with immediate, wide-scale implementation. Stakeholders like AI developers, social media platforms, and regulators work in collaboration within the sandbox to refine the detection algorithms and evaluate their effectiveness as content moderation tools.

These sandboxes can help balance the need for innovation in AI and the necessity of protecting the public from harmful misinformation. They allow the creation of a flexible and adaptive framework capable of evolving with technological advancements and fostering transparency between AI developers and regulators. This would lead to more informed policymaking and building public trust in AI applications.

CyberPeace Policy Recommendations 

Regulatory sandboxes offer a mechanism to predict solutions that will help to regulate the misinformation that AI tech creates. Some policy recommendations are as follows: 

1. Create guidelines for a global standard for including regulatory sandboxes that can be adapted locally and are useful in ensuring consistency in tackling AI-driven misinformation.
2. Regulators can propose to offer incentives to companies that participate in sandboxes. This would encourage innovation in developing anti-misinformation tools, which could include tax breaks or grants.
3. Awareness campaigns can help in educating the public about the risks of AI-driven misinformation and the role of regulatory sandboxes can help manage public expectations.
4. Periodic and regular reviews and updates to the sandbox frameworks should be conducted to keep pace with advancements in AI technology and emerging forms of misinformation should be emphasized.

‍

Conclusion and the Challenges for Regulatory Frameworks

Regulatory sandboxes offer a promising pathway to counter the challenges that AI-driven misinformation poses while fostering innovation. By providing a controlled environment for testing new AI tools, these sandboxes can help refine technologies aimed at detecting and mitigating false information. This approach ensures that AI development aligns with societal needs and regulatory standards, fostering greater trust and transparency. With the right support and ongoing adaptations, regulatory sandboxes can become vital in countering the spread of AI-generated misinformation, paving the way for a more secure and informed digital ecosystem.

References

• https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/on-the-importance-of-regulatory-sandboxes-in-artificial-intelligence/article68176084.ece
• https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/regulatory-sandboxes-in-artificial-intelligence_8f80a0e6-en.html
• https://www.weforum.org/publications/global-risks-report-2024/
• https://democracy-reporting.org/en/office/global/publications/chatbot-audit#Conclusions

‍