#FactCheck- Pakistan Video Falsely Shared as Attack on Army in West Bengal

Introduction
‍

" सर्वे भवन्तु सुखिनः, सर्वे सन्तु निरामयाः " May all be happy, may all be free from suffering. This timeless invocation reflects a vision of collective well-being, where progress is meaningful only when shared, and protection extends to every individual in society. This very philosophy lies at the heart of Corporate Social Responsibility, which seeks to ensure that growth is not isolated or unequal, but inclusive, ethical, and mindful of the broader social good.  

At its core, Corporate Social Responsibility is not merely a statutory obligation, it is a reflection of a deeper ethical commitment, an acknowledgement that growth must carry with it a sense of duty towards society. In many ways, CSR embodies the idea that progress without responsibility is incomplete, and that corporations, as key actors shaping modern life, must help safeguard the very communities they engage with.
‍

Reframing Digital Literacy Through Cyber Safety in CSR Frameworks
‍

In India, this moral vision has been given a legal structure under the Companies Act, 2013, CSR Schedule VII, which mandates certain classes of companies to allocate a portion of their profits towards socially beneficial activities. Section 135 of the Act requires companies meeting specified financial thresholds to undertake CSR initiatives, guided by principles of inclusivity, sustainability, and social welfare. The underlying values are clear, CSR is intended not as charity, but as a strategic and accountable contribution to societal development.

Schedule VII of the Act further outlines the broad areas that qualify as CSR, including “Education and Digital Literacy”, gender equality, rural development, and measures for reducing inequalities. Within this framework, promoting “digital literacy” has increasingly been recognised as a legitimate and necessary CSR activity, especially in the context of a rapidly digitising society like India.

However, the current understanding of digital literacy within CSR remains incomplete. It often emphasises access and usage, teaching individuals how to navigate digital platforms, use devices, and engage with online services. What remains insufficiently addressed is the question of safety. In an environment where cyber fraud, data breaches, online harassment, and identity theft are becoming increasingly common, digital literacy without cyber awareness risks becoming a partial and potentially harmful intervention.

Embedding cyber awareness and capacity building within ‘digital literacy’ in explicit form is therefore not optional, it is essential. This includes equipping individuals with the ability to recognise online threats, protect personal data, understand digital consent, and respond effectively to cyber risks. It also requires recognising that vulnerable populations, including first-time internet users, women, and marginalised communities, often face disproportionate exposure to cyber harm.

“It is pertinent to note that Cybersecurity awareness training is relevant to CSR but is not yet consistently implemented as an explicit CSR activity. It is often included indirectly within digital literacy programs, highlighting the need for a more structured, progressive and integrated approach.”

Given this reality, there is a strong case for explicitly recognising cyber awareness as a distinct and integral component of CSR activities, rather than treating it as an implicit subset of digital literacy. Doing so would not only align CSR with contemporary societal risks but also ensure that corporate interventions move beyond enabling access to actively ensuring safety.

In a digital society, empowerment without protection is incomplete. If CSR is to truly reflect its foundational values, it must evolve to address not just the opportunities of the digital age, but also its risks.
‍

Why Cyber Safety Must Be Central to CSR
‍

The current state of digital ecosystems, which used to operate as secondary systems, now functions as essential systems that support government operations, banking systems, educational institutions, and social communication. The digital environment has its vulnerabilities, which create direct dangers for people in society. The elderly, first-time internet users, and rural communities face higher cyber threat risks because they often lack knowledge and protective resources on responsible use. The implementation of CSR initiatives that provide digital access to these groups, along with how to handle risks, will create greater benefit for their safety. Organisations must encourage the implementation of cyber safety training in their CSR programs because doing so will create value while fulfilling their ethical obligations. The empowerment process needs to achieve complete success, which protects people from any potential dangers according to the "do no harm" principle.
‍

Key Components of CyberPeace-Aligned Digital Literacy
‍

To make CSR initiatives more effective and future-ready, organisations should incorporate the following elements into their digital literacy programs:

1. Cyber Awareness and Risk Recognition: The training program teaches participants how to recognise typical security threats, which include phishing attacks and scams, deepfake technology and misinformation.
2. Data Protection and Privacy Literacy: The program teaches users how to protect their personal information, together with the process of giving consent and the methods used to handle their online presence. 
3. Responsible Digital Behaviour: The program teaches people how to use the internet responsibly by showing them how to make ethical decisions that require both respect and accountability while understanding the legal consequences of their actions. 
4. Incident Response and Reporting Mechanisms: The program teaches users about cyber incident response, which includes all reporting methods and available support resources. 
5. Inclusion-Focused Design: The program develops specific solutions which protect various demographic groups from their particular vulnerabilities while maintaining accessibility and essential programmatic relevance.

Policy and Institutional Alignment
‍

The integration of cyber safety into corporate social responsibility lets organisations achieve their national objectives, which include:

• Strengthening digital trust and resilience
• Supporting safe digital inclusion initiatives
• Complementing the efforts of institutions working on cybersecurity awareness and capacity building

The structured approach requires organisations to execute three specific steps, which include:

• Partnering with cybersecurity organisations and civil society
• Developing standardised cyber awareness modules
• The organisation will use behavioural change indicators to evaluate its impact instead of relying on access metrics.

The Way Forward
‍

Digital-era Corporate Social Responsibility needs to transition from its present state of providing access to digital resources toward establishing secure online platforms for users. The understanding of digital literacy needs to shift from its current status as a technical ability toward its new definition as a social competency that encompasses safety, responsibility and resilience training.

Companies need to understand their digital transformation obligations because their digital transformation efforts require them to handle all associated risks. The implementation of cyber safety within corporate social responsibility frameworks will enable organisations to develop a secure and trustworthy digital environment that includes all users.

Conclusion
‍

The implementation of corporate social responsibility needs to fulfil its core mission of creating societal benefits through inclusive practices that span all current digital possibilities and their associated security threats. The field of digital literacy requires a new framework that combines digital safety practices with its existing educational materials.

The digital safety practice ensures that people obtain essential knowledge and skills that enable them to use digital resources securely when they access online content. The process of accomplishing shared community prosperity needs to establish a framework that benefits every person through social advancement and the protection of their rights.
‍

References
‍

• https://upload.indiacode.nic.in/schedulefile?aid=AC_CEN_22_29_00008_201318_1517807327856&rid=79
• https://www.allresearchjournal.com/archives/2025/vol11issue4/PartF/11-5-60-511.pdf
• https://www.unesco.org/en/dtc-finance-toolkit-factsheets/corporate-social-responsibility-csr
• https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/corp-social-responsibility.asp
• https://digitalmarketinginstitute.com/blog/corporate-16-brands-doing-corporate-social-responsibility-successfully
• https://www.imd.org/blog/sustainability/csr-strategy/

‍

Introduction

‍

Fundamentally, artificial intelligence (AI) is the greatest extension of human intelligence. It is the culmination of centuries of logic, reasoning, math, and creativity, machines trained to reflect cognition. However, such intelligence no longer resembles intelligence at all when it is put in the hands of the irresponsible, the one with malice, or the perverse, unleashed into the wild with minimal safeguards. Instead, distortion seems as a tool of debasement rather than enlightenment. 

Recent incidents involving sexually explicit photographs created by AI on social media sites reveal an extremely unsettling reality. When intelligence is detached from accountability, morality, and governance, it corrodes society rather than elevates it. We are seeing a failure of stewardship rather than just a failure of technology.

‍

The Cost of Unchecked Intelligence

‍

The AI chatbot Grok, which operates under Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter), is the subject of a debate that goes beyond a single platform or product. The romanticisation of “unfiltered” knowledge and the perilous notion that innovation should come before accountability are signs of a bigger lapse in the digital ecosystem. We have allowed mechanisms that can be used as weapons against human dignity, especially the dignity of women and children, in the name of freedom. 

We are no longer discussing artistic expression or experimental AI when a machine can digitally undress women, morph photos, or produce sexualised portrayals of kids with a few keystrokes. We stand in the face of algorithmic violence. Even if the physical touch is absent, the harm caused by it is genuine, long-lasting, and extremely personal. 

‍

The Regulatory Red Line

‍

A major inflexion was reached when the Indian government responded by ordering a thorough technical, procedural, and governance-level audit. It acknowledges that AI systems are not isolated entities. Platforms that use them are not neutral pipes, but rather intermediaries with responsibilities. The Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, the IT Act, the IT Rules 2021, and the possible removal of Section 79 safe-harbour safeguards all make it quite evident that innovation is not automatic immunity.

However, the fundamental dilemma cannot be resolved by legislation alone. AI is hailed as a force multiplier for innovation, productivity, and advancement, but when incentives are biased towards engagement, virality, and shock value, its misuse shows how easily intelligence can turn into ugliness. The output receives greater attention the more provocative it is. Profit increases with attention. Restraint turns into a business disadvantage in this ecology. 

‍

The Aftermath

‍

Grok’s own acknowledgement that “safeguard lapses” enabled the creation of pictures showing children wearing skimpy attire underscores a troubling reality, safety was not absent due to impossibility, but due to insufficiency. It was always possible to implement sophisticated filtering, more robust monitoring, and stricter oversight. They were simply not prioritised. When a system asserts that “no system is 100% foolproof,” it must also acknowledge that there is no acceptable margin of error when it comes to child protection.

The casual normalisation of such lapses is what is most troubling. By characterising these instances as “isolated cases,” systemic design decisions run the risk of being trivialised. In addition to intelligence, AI systems that have been taught on enormous amounts of human data also inherit bias, misogyny, and power imbalances. 

Conclusion

‍

What is required today is recalibration. Platforms need to shift from reactive compliance to proactive accountability. Safeguards must be incorporated at the architectural level; they cannot be cosmetic or post-facto. Governance must encompass enforced ethical boundaries in addition to terms of service. The idea that “edgy” AI is a sign of advancement must also be rejected by society.

Artificial Intelligence has never promised freedom under the guise of vulgarity. It was improvement, support, and augmentation. The fundamental core of intelligence is lost when it is used as a tool for degradation.So what’s left is a decision between principled innovation and unbridled novelty. Between responsibility and spectacle, between intelligence as purpose and intellect as power. 

‍

References

‍

https://www.rediff.com/news/report/govt-orders-x-review-of-grok-over-explicit-content/20260103.htm

In the rich history of humanity, the advent of artificial intelligence (AI) has added a new, delicate aspect. The aspect of promising technological advancement has the potential to either enrich the nest of our society or destroy it entirely. The latest straw in this complex nest is generative AI, a frontier teeming with both potential and perils. It is a realm where the ethereal concepts of cyber peace and resilience are not just theoretical constructs but tangible necessities.

The spectre of generative AI looms large over the digital landscape, casting a long shadow on the sanctity of data privacy and the integrity of political processes. The seeds of this threat were sown in the fertile soil of the Cambridge Analytica scandal of 2018, a watershed moment that unveiled the extent to which personal data could be harvested and utilized to influence electoral outcomes. However despite the indignation, the scandal resulted in meagre alterations to modus operandi of digital platforms.

Fast forward to the present day, and the spectre has only grown more ominous. A recent report by Human Rights Watch has shed light on the continued exploitation of data-driven campaigning in Hungary's re-election of Viktor Orbán. The report paints a chilling picture of political parties leveraging voter databases for targeted social media advertising, with the ruling Fidesz party even resorting to the unethical use of public service data to bolster its voter database.

The Looming Threat of Disinformation

As we stand on the precipice of 2024, a year that will witness over 50 countries holding elections, the advancements in generative AI could exponentially amplify the ability of political campaigns to manipulate electoral outcomes. This is particularly concerning in countries where information disparities are stark, providing fertile ground for the seeds of disinformation to take root and flourish.

The media, the traditional watchdog of democracy, has already begun to sound the alarm about the potential threats posed by deepfakes and manipulative content in the upcoming elections. The limited use of generative AI in disinformation campaigns has raised concerns about the enforcement of policies against generating targeted political materials, such as those designed to sway specific demographic groups towards a particular candidate.

Yet, while the threat of bad actors using AI to generate and disseminate disinformation is real and present, there is another dimension that has largely remained unexplored: the intimate interactions with chatbots. These digital interlocutors, when armed with advanced generative AI, have the potential to manipulate individuals without any intermediaries. The more data they have about a person, the better they can tailor their manipulations.

Root of the Cause 

To fully grasp the potential risks, we must journey back 30 years to the birth of online banner ads. The success of the first-ever banner ad for AT&T, which boasted an astounding 44% click rate, birthed a new era of digital advertising. This was followed by the advent of mobile advertising in the early 2000s. Since then, companies have been engaged in a perpetual quest to harness technology for manipulation, blurring the lines between commercial and political advertising in cyberspace.

Regrettably, the safeguards currently in place are woefully inadequate to prevent the rise of manipulative chatbots. Consider the case of Snapchat's My AI generative chatbot, which ostensibly assists users with trivia questions and gift suggestions. Unbeknownst to most users, their interactions with the chatbot are algorithmically harvested for targeted advertising. While this may not seem harmful in its current form, the profit motive could drive it towards more manipulative purposes.

If companies deploying chatbots like My AI face pressure to increase profitability, they may be tempted to subtly steer conversations to extract more user information, providing more fuel for advertising and higher earnings. This kind of nudging is not clearly illegal in the U.S. or the EU, even after the AI Act comes into effect. The market size of AI in India is projected to touch US$4.11bn in 2023. 

Taking this further, chatbots may be inclined to guide users towards purchasing specific products or even influencing significant life decisions, such as religious conversions or voting choices. The legal boundaries here remain unclear, especially when manipulation is not detectable by the user. 

The Crucial Dos/Dont's 

It is crucial to set rules and safeguards in order to manage the possible threats related to manipulative chatbots in the context of the general election in 2024.

First and foremost, candor and transparency are essential. Chatbots, particularly when employed for political or electoral matters, ought to make it clear to users what they are for and why they are automated. By being transparent, people are guaranteed to be aware that they are interacting with automated processes.

Second, getting user consent is crucial. Before collecting user data for any reason, including advertising or political profiling, users should be asked for their informed consent. Giving consumers easy ways to opt-in and opt-out gives them control over their data.

Furthermore, moral use is essential. It's crucial to create an ethics code for chatbot interactions that forbids manipulation, disseminating false information, and trying to sway users' political opinions. This guarantees that chatbots follow moral guidelines.

In order to preserve transparency and accountability, independent audits need to be carried out. Users might feel more confident knowing that chatbot behavior and data collecting procedures are regularly audited by impartial third parties to ensure compliance with legal and ethical norms.

Important "don'ts" to take into account. Coercion and manipulation ought to be outlawed completely. Chatbots should refrain from using misleading or manipulative approaches to sway users' political opinions or religious convictions.

Another hazard to watch out for is unlawful data collecting. Businesses must obtain consumers' express agreement before collecting personal information, and they must not sell or share this information for political reasons.

At all costs, one should steer clear of fake identities. Impersonating people or political figures is not something chatbots should do because it can result in manipulation and false information.

It is essential to be impartial. Bots shouldn't advocate for or take part in political activities that give preference to one political party over another. In encounters, impartiality and equity are crucial.

Finally, one should refrain from using invasive advertising techniques. Chatbots should ensure that advertising tactics comply with legal norms by refraining from displaying political advertisements or messaging without explicit user agreement.

Present Scenario

As we approach the critical 2024 elections and generative AI tools proliferate faster than regulatory measures can keep pace, companies must take an active role in building user trust, transparency, and accountability. This includes comprehensive disclosure about a chatbot's programmed business goals in conversations, ensuring users are fully aware of the chatbot's intended purposes.

To address the regulatory gap, stronger laws are needed. Both the EU AI Act and analogous laws across jurisdictions should be expanded to address the potential for manipulation in various forms. This effort should be driven by public demand, as the interests of lawmakers have been influenced by intensive Big Tech lobbying campaigns.

At present, India doesn’t have any specific laws pertaining to AI regulation. Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY), is the executive body responsible for AI strategies and is constantly working towards a policy framework for AI. The Niti Ayog has presented seven principles for responsible AI which includes equality , inclusivity, safety, privacy, transparency, accountability, dependability and protection of positive human values.

Conclusion 

We are at a pivotal juncture in history. As generative AI gains more power, we must proactively establish effective strategies to protect our privacy, rights and democracy. The public's waning confidence in Big Tech and the lessons learned from the techlash underscore the need for stronger regulations that hold tech companies accountable. Let's ensure that the power of generative AI is harnessed for the betterment of society and not exploited for manipulation.

Reference

McCallum, B. S. (2022, December 23). Meta settles Cambridge Analytica scandal case for $725m. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-64075067

Hungary: Data misused for political campaigns. (2022, December 1). Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/12/01/hungary-data-misused-political-campaigns

Statista. (n.d.). Artificial Intelligence - India | Statista Market forecast. https://www.statista.com/outlook/tmo/artificial-intelligence/india