#FactCheck -Misleading Claim Uses 2013 Army Coffin Photo to Spread False Ceasefire Narrative

Introduction

Attempts at countering the spread of misinformation can include various methods and differing degrees of engagement by different stakeholders. The inclusion of Artificial Intelligence, user awareness and steps taken on the part of the public at a larger level, focus on innovation to facilitate clear communication can be considered in the fight to counter misinformation. This becomes even more important in spaces that deal with matters of national security, such as the Indian army.

IIT Indore’s Intelligent Communication System

As per a report in Hindustan Times on 14th November 2024, IIT Indore has achieved a breakthrough on their project regarding Intelligent Communication Systems. The project is supported by the Department of Telecommunications (DoT), the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), and the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), as part of a specialised 6G research initiative (Bharat 6G Alliance) for innovation in 6G technology.

Professors at IIT Indore claim that the system they are working on has features different from the ones currently in use. They state that the receiver system can recognise coding, interleaving (a technique used to enhance existing error-correcting codes), and modulation methods together in situations of difficult environments, which makes it useful for transmitting information efficiently and securely, and thus could not only be used for telecommunication but the army as well. They also mention that previously, different receivers were required for different scenarios, however, they aim to build a system that has a single receiver that can adapt to any situation.

Previously, in another move that addressed the issue of misinformation in the army, the Ministry of Defence designated the Additional Directorate General of Strategic Communication in the Indian Army as the authorised officer to issue take-down notices regarding instances of posts consisting of illegal content and misinformation concerning the Army. 

Recommendations

Here are a few policy implications and deliberations one can explore with respect to innovations geared toward tackling misinformation within the army:

1. Research and Development: In this context, investment and research in better communication through institutes have enabled a system that ensures encrypted and secure communication, which helps with ways to combat misinformation for the army.
2. Strategic Deployment: Relevant innovations can focus on having separate pilot studies testing sensitive data in the military areas to assess their effectiveness.
3. Standardisation: Once tested, a set parameter of standards regarding the intelligence communication systems used can be encouraged.
4. Cybersecurity integration: As misinformation is largely spread online, innovation in such fields can encourage further exploration with regard to integration with Cybersecurity.

Conclusion

The spread of misinformation during modern warfare can have severe repercussions. Sensitive and clear data is crucial for safe and efficient communication as a lot is at stake. Innovations that are geared toward combating such issues must be encouraged, for they not only ensure efficiency and security with matters related to defence but also combat misinformation as a whole.

References

1. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/indore/iit-indore-unveils-groundbreaking-intelligent-receivers-for-enhanced-6g-and-military-communication-security/articleshow/115265902.cms
2. https://www.hindustantimes.com/technology/6g-technology-and-intelligent-receivers-will-ease-way-for-army-intelligence-operations-iit-official-101731574418660.html

Executive Summary

An image showing Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha and Congress MP Rahul Gandhi standing face to face inside Parliament is going viral on social media. Several users are sharing the image claiming that the photograph was taken during the ongoing Budget Session, suggesting a direct face-off between the two leaders inside Parliament. However, research conducted by the CyberPeacehas found that the viral claim is false. The image in question is not real but has been generated using Artificial Intelligence (AI). The AI-generated image is now being shared on social media with a misleading claim.

‍

Claim

‍

A Facebook user named Madhu Davi shared the viral image on January 30, 2026, with the caption: “If this photo is from today and the Budget Session, it is commendable. RAGA Zindabad.”

(Archived version of the post available here.)

• https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=759145877237871&set=a.110639115421887 
• https://perma.cc/N2XD-TZ32?type=image 
  ‍

‍

Fact Check: 

‍

To verify the viral claim, we first conducted a keyword search on Google to check whether any credible media outlet had reported such an incident during the Budget Session. However, no news reports supporting the claim were found. We then performed a reverse image search using Google Lens, but this too did not yield any reliable media reports or evidence confirming the authenticity of the image. This raised suspicion that the image might be AI-generated. To further verify, the image was analysed using the AI detection tool Hive Moderation. The tool indicated a probability of over 99 per cent that the image was generated using Artificial Intelligence.

‍

‍

Conclusion

‍

CyberPeace research confirms that the image being circulated with the claim that Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Rahul Gandhi came face to face during the Budget Session is fake. The viral image has been created using AI and is being shared with a false and misleading narrative.

‍

Introduction

In 2022, Oxfam’s India Inequality report revealed the worsening digital divide, highlighting that only 38% of households in the country are digitally literate. Further, only 31% of the rural population uses the internet, as compared to 67% of the urban population. Over time, with the increasing awareness about the importance of digital privacy globally, the definition of digital divide has translated into a digital privacy divide, whereby different levels of privacy are afforded to different sections of society. This further promotes social inequalities and impedes access to fundamental rights.

Digital Privacy Divide: A by-product of the digital divide

The digital divide has evolved into a multi-level issue from its earlier interpretations; level I implies the lack of physical access to technologies, level II refers to the lack of digital literacy and skills and recently, level III relates to the impacts of digital access. Digital Privacy Divide (DPD) refers to the various gaps in digital privacy protection provided to users based on their socio-demographic patterns. It forms a subset of the digital divide, which involves uneven distribution, access and usage of information and communication technology (ICTs). Typically, DPD exists when ICT users receive distinct levels of digital privacy protection. As such, it forms a part of the conversation on digital inequality. 

Contrary to popular perceptions, DPD, which is based on notions of privacy, is not always based on ideas of  individualism and collectivism and may constitute internal and external factors at the national level. A study on the impacts of DPD conducted in the U.S., India, Bangladesh and Germany highlighted that respondents in Germany and Bangladesh expressed more concerns about their privacy compared to respondents in the U.S. and India. This suggests that despite the U.S. having a strong tradition of individualistic rights, that is reflected in internal regulatory frameworks such as the Fourth Amendment, the topic of data privacy has not garnered enough interest from the population. Most individuals consider forgoing the right to privacy as a necessary evil to access many services, and schemes and to stay abreast with technological advances. Research shows that 62%- 63% of Americans believe that companies and the government collecting data have become an inescapable necessary evil in modern life. Additionally, 81% believe that they have very little control over what data companies collect and about 81% of Americans believe that the risk of data collection outweighs the benefits. Similarly, in Japan, data privacy is thought to be an adopted concept emerging from international pressure to regulate, rather than as an ascribed right, since collectivism and collective decision-making are more valued in Japan, positioning the concept of privacy as subjective, timeserving and an idea imported from the West.

Regardless, inequality in privacy preservation often reinforces social inequality. Practices like surveillance that are geared towards a specific group highlight that marginalised communities are more likely to have less data privacy. As an example, migrants, labourers, persons with a conviction history and marginalised racial groups are often subject to extremely invasive surveillance under suspicions of posing threats and are thus forced to flee their place of birth or residence. This also highlights the fact that focus on DPD is not limited to those who lack data privacy but also to those who have (either by design or by force) excess privacy. While on one end, excessive surveillance, carried out by both governments and private entities, forces immigrants to wait in deportation centres during the pendency of their case, the other end of the privacy extreme hosts a vast number of undocumented individuals who avoid government contact for fear of deportation, despite noting high rates of crime victimization.

DPD is also noted among groups with differential knowledge and skills in cyber security. For example, in India, data privacy laws mandate that information be provided on order of a court or any enforcement agency. However, individuals with knowledge of advanced encryption are adopting communication channels that have encryption protocols that the provider cannot control (and resultantly able to exercise their right to privacy more effectively),  in contrast with individuals who have little knowledge of encryption, implying a security as well as an intellectual divide. While several options for secure communication exist, like Pretty Good Privacy, which enables encrypted emailing, they are complex and not easy to use in addition to having negative reputations, like the Tor Browser. Cost considerations also are a major factor in propelling DPD since users who cannot afford devices like those by Apple, which have privacy by default, are forced to opt for devices that have relatively poor in-built encryption. 

Children remain the most vulnerable group. During the pandemic, it was noted that only 24% of Indian households had internet facilities to access e-education and several reported needing to access free internet outside of their homes. These public networks are known for their lack of security and privacy, as traffic can be monitored by the hotspot operator or others on the network if proper encryption measures are not in place. Elsewhere, students without access to devices for remote learning have limited alternatives and are often forced to rely on Chromebooks and associated Google services. In response to this issue, Google provided free Chromebooks and mobile hotspots to students in need during the pandemic, aiming to address the digital divide. However, in 2024, New Mexico was reported to be suing Google for allegedly collecting children’s data through its educational products provided to the state's schools, claiming that it tracks students' activities on their personal devices outside of the classroom. It signified the problems in ensuring the privacy of lower-income students while accessing basic education.

Policy Recommendations

Digital literacy is one of the critical components in bridging the DPD. It enables individuals to gain skills, which in turn effectively addresses privacy violations. Studies show that low-income users remain less confident in their ability to manage their privacy settings as compared to high-income individuals. Thus, emphasis should be placed not only on educating on technology usage but also on privacy practices since it aims to improve people’s Internet skills and take informed control of their digital identities.

In the U.S., scholars have noted the role of libraries and librarians in safeguarding intellectual privacy. The Library Freedom Project, for example, has sought to ensure that the skills and knowledge required to ensure internet freedoms are available to all. The Project channelled one of the core values of the library profession i.e. intellectual freedom, literacy, equity of access to recorded knowledge and information, privacy and democracy. As a result, the Project successfully conducted workshops on internet privacy for the public and also openly objected to the Department of Homeland Security’s attempts to shut down the use of encryption technologies in libraries. The International Federation of Library Association adopted a Statement of Privacy in the Library Environment in 2015 that specified “when libraries and information services provide access to resources, services or technologies that may compromise users’ privacy, libraries should encourage users to be aware of the implications and provide guidance in data protection and privacy.” The above should be used as an indicative case study for setting up similar protocols in inclusive public institutions like Anganwadis, local libraries, skill development centres and non-government/non-profit organisations in India, where free education is disseminated. The workshops conducted must inculcate two critical aspects; firstly, enhancing the know-how of using public digital infrastructure and popular technologies (thereby de-alienating technology) and secondly, shifting the viewpoint of privacy as a right an individual has and not something that they own.

However, digital literacy should not be wholly relied on, since it shifts the responsibility of privacy protection to the individual, who may not either be aware or cannot be controlled. Data literacy also does not address the larger issue of data brokers, consumer profiling, surveillance etc. Resultantly, an obligation on companies to provide simplified privacy summaries, in addition to creating accessible, easy-to-use technical products and privacy tools,  should be necessitated. Most notable legislations address this problem by mandating notices and consent for collecting personal data of users, despite slow enforcement. However, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 in India aims to address DPD by not only mandating valid consent but also ensuring that privacy policies remain accessible in local languages, given the diversity of the population.

References

• https://idronline.org/article/inequality/indias-digital-divide-from-bad-to-worse/ 
• https://arxiv.org/pdf/2110.02669 
• https://arxiv.org/pdf/2201.07936#:~:text=The%20DPD%20index%20is%20a,(33%20years%20and%20over). 
• https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/11/15/americans-and-privacy-concerned-confused-and-feeling-lack-of-control-over-their-personal-information/ 
• https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/67203/1/Internet%20freedom%20for%20all%20Public%20libraries%20have%20to%20get%20serious%20about%20tackling%20the%20digital%20privacy%20divi.pdf 
• /https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6265&context=law_lawreview 
• https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/67203/1/Internet%20freedom%20for%20all%20Public%20libraries%20have%20to%20get%20serious%20about%20tackling%20the%20digital%20privacy%20divi.pdf 
• https://bosniaca.nub.ba/index.php/bosniaca/article/view/488/pdf 
• https://www.hindustantimes.com/education/just-24-of-indian-households-have-internet-facility-to-access-e-education-unicef/story-a1g7DqjP6lJRSh6D6yLJjL.html 
• https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbestechcouncil/2021/05/05/the-pandemic-has-unmasked-the-digital-privacy-divide/ 
• https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Digital%20Personal%20Data%20Protection%20Act%202023.pdf 
• https://www.isc.meiji.ac.jp/~ethicj/Privacy%20protection%20in%20Japan.pdf 
• https://socialchangenyu.com/review/the-surveillance-gap-the-harms-of-extreme-privacy-and-data-marginalization/