#FactCheck -False Claim About Indian Ships Paying Iran in Yuan to Pass Strait of Hormuz Goes Viral Amid Geopolitical Tensions

Introduction

The debate between free speech and social responsibility is one of the oldest, long-running debates in history. Free speech is considered to be at the heart of every democracy. It is considered the “mother” of all other freedoms, enshrined in Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution under Part III: Fundamental Rights. It takes various shapes and forms according to the sociopolitical context of society. Evelyn Beatrice Hall, a prominent English writer of the 19th century, laid the foundation of every democracy when she wrote in her book, "I disapprove of what you say, but I willdefend to the death your right to say it." The drastic misuse of social media to disseminate propaganda and fakenews makes it a marketplace of half-baked truth, becoming the antithesis ofwhat early philosophers dreamed of for a democratic modern age. Losethe ethics, and there you have it, the modern conceptualisation of freedom ofspeech and expression in the digital age. The right to freedom of speech andexpression is one of the most fundamental rights, but its exercise is notunfettered, and certain limits are placed upon this right under Art. 19 (2).Every right comes with a corresponding duty, and the exercise of such freedomalso puts the citizenry under the responsibility not to violate the rights ofothers and not to use the media to demean any other person.

SocialMedia: The New Public Square or a Weaponised Echo Chamber

InIndia, Art. 19(1)(a) of the constitution guarantees the right to freedom ofspeech and expression, but it is not absolute. Under Art. 19(2), this right issubject to reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order, decency,morality, and national security. This is construed as a freedom for everyindividual to freely express their opinions, but not to incite violence, spreadfalsehoods, or harm others’ dignity. Unfortunately, the boundaries betweenthese are increasingly blurred.

Thedissemination of unfiltered media and the strangulation of innocence by pushingoften vulgar and obscene content down the throats of individuals, withoutverifying the age and gender profile of the social media user, is a big farcein the name of free speech and a conscious attempt by the intermediaries andsocial media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, Threads, etc., to wriggleout of their responsibility. A prime example is when Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg, on7th January 2025, gave a statement asserting less intervention into what peoplefind on its social media platforms as the new “best practice”. While lessinterference would have worked in a generation that merely operated on thediffering, dissenting, and raw ideas bred by the minds of differentindividuals, it is not the case for this day and age. There has been asignificant rise in cases where social media platforms have been used as abattleground for disputes, spreading communal violence, misinformation, anddisinformation.

Thereis no debate about the fact that social media platforms have fostered a globalexpression, making the world a global village, bringing everyone together. Onthe other hand, the platforms have become the epicentre of computer-basedcrimes, where children and teenagers often become prey to these crimes,cyberbullying, and cyberstalking.  

Rising Importance of Platform Accountability

Themost pertinent question that is to be asked with a conscious mind is whether anunregulated media is a reflection of Freedom of Speech, a right given to us byour constitution under Article. 19(1)(a), or whether free speech is just a garbby big stakeholders, and we are all victims of an impending infodemic andvictims of AI algorithms, because, as per the reports that surfaced during theCovid-19 pandemic, India saw a dramatic 214% rise in false information. Anotherreport by the UNESCO-Ipsos survey revealed that 85% of Indian respondentsencounter online hate speech, with around 64% pointing to social media as aprimary source.

While the focus on platform accountability is critical, it is equally important to recognise that the right to free speech is not absolute. Therefore, users also bear a constitutional responsibility while exercising this right. Free expression in a democratic society must be accompanied by civic digital behaviour, which includes refraining from spreading hate speech, misinformation, or engaging in harmful conduct online. The most recent example of this is the case of Ranveer Gautam Allahabadia vs. UOI (popularly known as “Latent Case”); the court came down heavily on the hosts and makers of the show and made its position crystal clear by stating, “there is nothinglike a fundamental right on platter...the fundamental rights are all followedby a duty...unless those people understand duty, there is no [...] deal withthat kind of elements...if somebody wants to enjoy fundamental rights, thiscountry gives a guarantee to enjoy, but guarantee is with a duty so thatguarantee will involve performing that duty also” .

The Way Forward: CyberPeace Suggests

In order to realise the benefits and derive the true benefits from the rights we are provided, especially the one in discussion, i.e., Freedom of Speech and Expression, the government and the designated intermediaries and regulators have to prepare both roadmaps, one for “Platform Accountability” and one for "User Accountability”, wherein the regulators with a reasonable foresight should conduct Algorithm Risk Audits which is a technique to make algorithms and there effects on content feeds visible. It can be an effective tool and an objective manner to compare how algorithms are automatically pushing different content to different users in an unfair or unbalanced way. As for user accountability, “Digital Literacy” is the way forward, ensuring that social media remains a marketplace of ideas and does not become a minefield of misfires.

Introduction

With the rise of AI deepfakes and manipulated media, it has become difficult for the average internet user to know what they can trust online. Synthetic media can have serious consequences, from virally spreading election disinformation or medical misinformation to serious consequences like revenge porn and financial fraud. Recently, a Pune man lost ₹43 lakh when he invested money based on a deepfake video of Infosys founder Narayana Murthy. In another case, that of Babydoll Archi, a woman from Assam had her likeness deepfaked by an ex-boyfriend to create revenge porn.

Image or video manipulation used to leave observable traces. Online sources may advise examining the edges of objects in the image, checking for inconsistent patterns, lighting differences, observing the lip movements of the speaker in a video or counting the number of fingers on a person’s hand. Unfortunately, as the technology improves, such folk advice might not always help users identify synthetic and manipulated media.

‍

The Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA)

‍

One interesting project in the area of trust-building under these circumstances has been the Coalition for Content Provenance and Authenticity (C2PA). Started in 2019 by Adobe and Microsoft, C2PA is a collaboration between major players in AI, social media, journalism, and photography, among others. It set out to create a standard for publishers of digital media to prove the authenticity of digital media and track changes as they occur.

When photos and videos are captured, they generally store metadata like the date and time of capture, the location, the device it was taken on, etc. C2PA developed a standard for sharing and checking the validity of this metadata, and adding additional layers of metadata whenever a new user makes any edits. This creates a digital record of any and all changes made. Additionally, the original media is bundled with this metadata. This makes it easy to verify the source of the image and check if the edits change the meaning or impact of the media. This standard allows different validation software, content publishers and content creation tools to be interoperable in terms of maintaining and displaying proof of authenticity.

‍

‍

‍

The standard is intended to be used on an opt-in basis and can be likened to a nutrition label for digital media. Importantly, it does not limit the creativity of fledgling photo editors or generative AI enthusiasts; it simply provides consumers with more information about the media they come across.

‍

Could C2PA be Useful in an Indian Context?

‍

The World Economic Forum’s Global Risk Report 2024, identifies India as a significant hotspot for misinformation. The recent AI Regulation report by MeitY indicates an interest in tools for watermarking AI-based synthetic content for ease of detecting and tracking harmful outcomes. Perhaps C2PA can be useful in this regard as it takes a holistic approach to tracking media manipulation, even in cases where AI is not the medium.

Currently, 26 India-based organisations like the Times of India or Truefy AI have signed up to the Content Authenticity Initiative (CAI), a community that contributes to the development and adoption of tools and standards like C2PA. However, people are increasingly using social media sites like WhatsApp and Instagram as sources of information, both of which are owned by Meta and have not yet implemented the standard in their products.

India also has low digital literacy rates and low resistance to misinformation. Part of the challenge would be showing people how to read this nutrition label, to empower people to make better decisions online. As such, C2PA is just one part of an online trust-building strategy. It is crucial that education around digital literacy and policy around organisational adoption of the standard are also part of the strategy.

The standard is also not foolproof. Current iterations may still struggle when presented with screenshots of digital media and other non-technical digital manipulation. Linking media to their creator may also put journalists and whistleblowers at risk. Actual use in context will show us more about how to improve future versions of digital provenance tools, though these improvements are not guarantees of a safer internet.

The largest advantage of C2PA adoption would be the democratisation of fact-checking infrastructure. Since media is shared at a significantly faster rate than it can be verified by professionals, putting the verification tools in the hands of people makes the process a lot more scalable. It empowers citizen journalists and leaves a public trail for any media consumer to look into.

‍

Conclusion

‍

From basic colour filters to make a scene more engaging, to removing a crowd from a social media post, to editing together videos of a politician to make it sound like they are singing a song, we are so accustomed to seeing the media we consume be altered in some way. The C2PA is just one way to bring transparency to how media is altered. It is not a one-stop solution, but it is a viable starting point for creating a fairer and democratic internet and increasing trust online. While there are risks to its adoption, it is promising to see that organisations across different sectors are collaborating on this project to be more transparent about the media we consume.

References

‍

• https://c2pa.org/
• https://contentauthenticity.org/
• https://indianexpress.com/article/technology/tech-news-technology/kate-middleton-9-signs-edited-photo-9211799/  
• https://photography.tutsplus.com/articles/fakes-frauds-and-forgeries-how-to-detect-image-manipulation--cms-22230
• https://www.media.mit.edu/projects/detect-fakes/overview/
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qO0WvudbO04&pp=0gcJCbAJAYcqIYzv
• https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_The_Global_Risks_Report_2024.pdf
• https://indianexpress.com/article/technology/tech-news-technology/ai-law-may-not-prescribe-penal-consequences-for-violations-9457780/
• https://thesecretariat.in/article/meity-s-ai-regulation-report-ambitious-but-no-concrete-solutions
• https://www.ndtv.com/lifestyle/assam-what-babydoll-archi-viral-fame-says-about-india-porn-problem-8878689
• https://www.meity.gov.in/static/uploads/2024/02/9f6e99572739a3024c9cdaec53a0a0ef.pdf

‍

Introduction
‍

India's digital governance system is experiencing a significant transformation. The Department of Telecommunications (DoT) has extended the deadline for implementing SIM binding requirements for messaging platforms to December 31, 2026, while also stepping back from earlier proposals such as mandatory periodic web logouts. 

The government extended the current proposal but decided to cancel its previous requirement, which mandated messaging platforms to implement mandatory logout periods. The authorities implemented this action to control the increasing occurrence of digital impersonation, financial fraud, online scams and identity theft, which occurs through messaging applications.

The authorities are said to have implemented this action to control the increasing occurrence of digital impersonation, financial fraud, online scams and identity theft, which occurs through messaging applications.
‍

What Has Changed
‍

The SIM binding mandate, which the Telecommunication Cyber Security framework introduced in late 2025 requires messaging platforms to maintain user account connections with active SIM cards that match their registered mobile numbers. 

Platforms received a brief period for compliance with the original rules. Industry stakeholders, which included messaging services and device manufacturers, reported that they faced major technical and operational problems when trying to constantly verify SIM status on different devices and operating systems. 

The government postponed the compliance date to December 2026 to give organisations extra time for the gradual implementation of requirements. The policy now permits platforms to use risk-based or adaptive logout mechanisms, which enable security management without enforcing standard security procedures through their web messaging application platforms. 

‍

Why the Extension Was Necessary
‍

The extension operates as a recognition of both technical feasibility constraints and ecosystem's complex nature. Multiple devices at present enable messaging platforms to function which includes smartphones and desktops and web interfaces with real time synchronization. The system needs complete operational system and hardware component integration to maintain active SIM verification throughout all environments because stakeholders estimated that this process would take time to achieve proper results. 

The operating system providers and smartphone manufacturers expressed their worries about system limitations, which include testing procedures and compatibility problems. 

The government recognised through its deadline extension that security requirements need technical feasibility and scalability to function properly without causing service interruptions or requiring immediate implementation.

‍

Security Rationale Behind SIM Binding
‍

The SIM binding system serves its main purpose to enhance accountability while it protects digital communication systems from unauthorised use. Authorities have identified that messaging accounts can remain active even after the associated SIM card is removed, deactivated, or moved across regions. The situation creates paths for criminals to commit fraud and impersonation while perpetrating cybercrime across international borders because they can use digital identities that are hard to trace. 

The SIM binding system exists to solve this problem by 

• requiring active, Virtual KYC-verified SIMs to authenticate messaging accounts. 
• Users cannot access the system until they connect their active SIM. 
• The system maintains the capacity to track and authenticate digital identities. 

The measure aims to eliminate a security gap that digital communication systems currently use for fraudulent activities and identity theft.

‍

Shift Toward Risk-Based Regulation
‍

The current development marks a major change because it no longer applies fixed rules that used to determine what organisations must do, but now uses risk assessment methods. The previous plan, which required users to log out every six hours from web sessions, has been replaced by platforms that now log users out based on their risk assessment. The shift demonstrates that cybersecurity needs to implement security measures that require specific context and need to match the existing environment. Organisations face challenges when trying to apply standard rules because users exhibit various behaviours while using different devices on multiple platforms. 

The risk-based model enables platforms to detect suspicious activity through dynamic monitoring, which establishes strict security measures for high-risk situations while preserving system access during periods of low risk.

‍

Implications for the Digital Ecosystem
‍

The extension, together with its related policy alterations, creates significant effects for organisations. The extra time allows the industry to create systems that can work together with different ecosystems while testing their implementation process and matching their required operational standards. 

The shift shows policymakers that they should adopt a process that combines multiple rounds of assessment with stakeholder input to develop their regulations. 

The upcoming changes will create invisible effects for users, which will determine the future methods of digital identity verification and the security functions of communication platforms.

‍

Conclusion
‍

The extension of the SIM binding deadline represents a new approach to regulations instead of being a regulatory rollback. The process requires both dedicated efforts and actual implementation to create secure digital environments. 

India needs to establish secure and scalable user-friendly systems while advancing its digital infrastructure development. The current developments show progress toward achieving a solution that protects cybersecurity needs while considering technological facts and user experience. Organisations face two main obstacles in modern interdependent systems: they must protect their systems while maintaining user trust and system protection, and their capability to operate over extended periods.
‍

References
‍

• https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/government-shelves-periodic-web-logout-for-chat-apps-extends-sim-binding-to-december-31/article70811929.ece
• https://www.gadgets360.com/telecom/news/dot-sim-binding-mandate-extension-2026-report-11301917

‍