#Factcheck-Allu Arjun visits Shiva temple after success of Pushpa 2? No, image is from 2017
Executive Summary:
Recently, a viral post on social media claiming that actor Allu Arjun visited a Shiva temple to pray in celebration after the success of his film, PUSHPA 2. The post features an image of him visiting the temple. However, an investigation has determined that this photo is from 2017 and does not relate to the film's release.
Claims:
The claim states that Allu Arjun recently visited a Shiva temple to express his thanks for the success of Pushpa 2, featuring a photograph that allegedly captures this moment.
Fact Check:
The image circulating on social media, that Allu Arjun visited a Shiva temple to celebrate the success of Pushpa 2, is misleading.
After conducting a reverse image search, we confirmed that this photograph is from 2017, taken during the actor's visit to the Tirumala Temple for a personal event, well before Pushpa 2 was ever announced. The context has been altered to falsely connect it to the film's success. Additionally, there is no credible evidence or recent reports to support the claim that Allu Arjun visited a temple for this specific reason, making the assertion entirely baseless.
Before sharing viral posts, take a brief moment to verify the facts. Misinformation spreads quickly and it’s far better to rely on trusted fact-checking sources.
Conclusion:
The claim that Allu Arjun visited a Shiva temple to celebrate the success of Pushpa 2 is false. The image circulating is actually from an earlier time. This situation illustrates how misinformation can spread when an old photo is used to construct a misleading story. Before sharing viral posts, take a moment to verify the facts. Misinformation spreads quickly, and it is far better to rely on trusted fact-checking sources.
- Claim: The image claims Allu Arjun visited Shiva temple after Pushpa 2’s success.
- Claimed On: Facebook
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Related Blogs
Introduction
In the dynamic realm of online gaming, where virtual worlds and competitive landscapes converge, ensuring the safety of players has become an imperative task. As the digital gaming community expands, so do the challenges of navigating potential risks and threats. There is a need for crucial strategies and measures aimed at safeguarding players and fostering a secure environment where gamers can fully immerse themselves in their passion without compromising their well-being. Online gaming, a thriving industry, makes gamers attractive targets for cyber theft, including account takeovers (ATO). ATO involves stealing characters, inventory, in-game currencies, achievements, and skins, with high-level accounts as prime targets. Gamers face real-life consequences as fraud within games can compromise personal information, including location, credentials, credit card details, and more. Protecting oneself involves maintaining privacy in sharing information, enabling two-factor authentication, and employing strong, unique passwords with security solutions that provide additional safeguards for an uninterrupted gaming experience.
Online Gaming Carries The Following Major Risks
Viruses and malware: Searching for less expensive or free downloads of your preferred games puts you in danger of accidentally downloading malware and viruses.
Theft of identity: Hackers gather information that is personally identifiable to create victimised identities. The chat feature is one of the possible risks of playing video games online with random people.
Invasion of a profile: It's not advisable to use an identical password and username across all of your preferred video game platforms since if hackers manage to obtain your login information, they may hack all of your player accounts and perhaps take control of them.
Swatting and doxing: Doxxing is the practice of hackers publishing your residential location or telephone number online after obtaining your private data. Swatting is a dangerous harassment tactic originating from online gaming, involving false emergency reports to provoke an excessive police response at the unsuspecting victim's location.
How Hacking Poses Serious Risks to Online Gaming Security
The video game industry has experienced rapid growth in recent times, catering to millions of players throughout the globe who relish an extensive array of engaging adventures. But because of its widespread use, hackers are now more likely to target it in an attempt to take advantage of its weaknesses.
Hackers are drawn to the gaming business for a number of reasons.
Due to its enormous income potential, this sector is an appealing option for investment. Players' large audience offers a treasure trove of private data that can be used for fraudulent transactions and other nefarious activities. Because of its high exposure, the sector is a tempting target for attackers looking to achieve recognition or make an impression. Customers wish to add modifications, cheats, or other external software to their contest, which increases the threat. In this sector, there is fierce competition, and winners take home large cash awards. This encourages players to use DDoS attacks to their advantage in order to outperform their rivals.
Importance of Secure Servers
Upgrade server applications and Modifications
Maintaining the most recent versions of all server software is a basic step in gaming server security. Updates and patches are regularly released by developers to address security flaws, therefore it's imperative to install them right away. If you ignore updates, your server becomes vulnerable to known vulnerabilities and a prime target for cybercriminals.
Put Strict Access Controls in Place
It is essential to manage who has permission to access your gaming system to avoid violations and unwanted access. Use strong password regulations and mandate complicated passwords for administrators on the system.
Two-factor authentication (2FA) into place
Restrict access rights to those who need them for administrative tasks to lessen the possibility of unlicensed individuals taking over a server.Safety Measures Players should be urged to adhere to best practices, which include:
Using secure passwords.
Avoid clicking on dubious links.
Updating software & apps regularly.
Upgrading antivirus software regularlyImproving cybersecurity practices and bringing attention to possible risks can greatly improve the general population's safety in gaming.
Conclusion
The internet gaming industry's rapid expansion has resulted in increased security threats in addition to recreation. Players confront various threats, including growing hacking attempts, sensitive information leaks, malware, identity theft, and doxing. To reduce these dangers, secure servers are essential. They emphasise the importance of frequent upgrades, restricting access, and user training. It becomes essential to enable security measures to keep ahead of emerging dangers. Enhancing safety measures guarantees a more secure gaming environment, safeguarding the large population that participates in this quickly changing digital space.
References
https://www.kaspersky.com/resource-center/threats/top-10-online-gaming-risks
https://www.imperva.com/blog/cyber-attacks-gaming-industry/
https://www.techslang.com/securing-gaming-servers-cybersecurity-best-practices-for-online-gaming-communities/
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/1/13/16888710/barris-swatting-death-charges
Introduction
The appeal is to be heard by the TDSAT (telecommunication dispute settlement & appellate tribunal) regarding several changes under Digital personal data protection. The Changes should be a removal of the deemed consent, a change in appellate mechanism, No change in delegation legislation, and under data breach. And there are some following other changes in the bill, and the digital personal data protection bill 2023 will now provide a negative list of countries that cannot transfer the data.
New Version of the DPDP Bill
The Digital Personal Data Protection Bill has a new version. There are three major changes in the 2022 draft of the digital personal data protection bill. The changes are as follows: The new version proposes changes that there shall be no deemed consent under the bill and that the personal data processing should be for limited uses only. By giving the deemed consent, there shall be consent for the processing of data for any purposes. That is why there shall be no deemed consent.
- In the interest of the sovereignty
- The integrity of India and the National Security
- For the issue of subsidies, benefits, services, certificates, licenses, permits, etc
- To comply with any judgment or order under the law
- To protect, assist, or provide service in a medical or health emergency, a disaster situation, or to maintain public order
- In relation to an employee and his/her rights
The 2023 version now includes an appeals mechanism
It states that the Board will have the authority to issue directives for data breach remediation or mitigation, investigate data breaches and complaints, and levy financial penalties. It would be authorised to submit complaints to alternative dispute resolution, accept voluntary undertakings from data fiduciaries, and advise the government to prohibit a data fiduciary’s website, app, or other online presence if the terms of the law were regularly violated. The Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal will hear any appeals.
The other change is in delegated legislation, as one of the criticisms of the 2022 version bill was that it gave the government extensive rule-making powers. The committee also raised the same concern with the ministry. The committed wants that the provisions that cannot be fully defined within the scope of the bill can be addressed.
The other major change raised in the new version bill is regarding the data breach; there will be no compensation for the data breach. This raises a significant concern for the victims, If the victims suffer a data breach and he approaches the relevant court or authority, he will not be awarded compensation for the loss he has suffered due to the data breach.
Need of changes under DPDP
There is a need for changes in digital personal data protection as we talk about the deemed consent so simply speaking, by ‘deeming’ consent for subsequent uses, your data may be used for purposes other than what it has been provided for and, as there is no provision for to be informed of this through mandatory notice, there may never even come to know about it.
Conclusion
The bill requires changes to meet the need of evolving digital landscape in the digital personal data protection 2022 draft. The removal of deemed consent will ultimately protect the data of the data principal. And the data of the data principal will be used or processed only for the purpose for which the consent is given. The change in the appellate mechanism is also crucial as it meets the requirements of addressing appeals. However, the no compensation for a data breach is derogatory to the interest of the victim who has suffered a data breach.
There has been a struggle to create legal frameworks that can define where free speech ends and harmful misinformation begins, specifically in democratic societies where the right to free expression is a fundamental value. Platforms like YouTube, Wikipedia, and Facebook have gained a huge consumer base by focusing on hosting user-generated content. This content includes anything a visitor puts on a website or social media pages.
The legal and ethical landscape surrounding misinformation is dependent on creating a fine balance between freedom of speech and expression while protecting public interests, such as truthfulness and social stability. This blog is focused on examining the legal risks of misinformation, specifically user-generated content, and the accountability of platforms in moderating and addressing it.
The Rise of Misinformation and Platform Dynamics
Misinformation content is amplified by using algorithmic recommendations and social sharing mechanisms. The intent of spreading false information is closely interwoven with the assessment of user data to identify target groups necessary to place targeted political advertising. The disseminators of fake news have benefited from social networks to reach more people, and from the technology that enables faster distribution and can make it more difficult to distinguish fake from hard news.
Multiple challenges emerge that are unique to social media platforms regulating misinformation while balancing freedom of speech and expression and user engagement. The scale at which content is created and published, the different regulatory standards, and moderating misinformation without infringing on freedom of expression complicate moderation policies and practices.
The impacts of misinformation on social, political, and economic consequences, influencing public opinion, electoral outcomes, and market behaviours underscore the urgent need for effective regulation, as the consequences of inaction can be profound and far-reaching.
Legal Frameworks and Evolving Accountability Standards
Safe harbour principles allow for the functioning of a free, open and borderless internet. This principle is embodied under the US Communications Decency Act and the Information Technology Act in Sections 230 and 79 respectively. They play a pivotal role in facilitating the growth and development of the Internet. The legal framework governing misinformation around the world is still in nascent stages. Section 230 of the CDA protects platforms from legal liability relating to harmful content posted on their sites by third parties. It further allows platforms to police their sites for harmful content and protects them from liability if they choose not to.
By granting exemptions to intermediaries, these safe harbour provisions help nurture an online environment that fosters free speech and enables users to freely express themselves without arbitrary intrusions.
A shift in regulations has been observed in recent times. An example is the enactment of the Digital Services Act of 2022 in the European Union. The Act requires companies having at least 45 million monthly users to create systems to control the spread of misinformation, hate speech and terrorist propaganda, among other things. If not followed through, they risk penalties of up to 6% of the global annual revenue or even a ban in EU countries.
Challenges and Risks for Platforms
There are multiple challenges and risks faced by platforms that surround user-generated misinformation.
- Moderating user-generated misinformation is a big challenge, primarily because of the quantity of data in question and the speed at which it is generated. It further leads to legal liabilities, operational costs and reputational risks.
- Platforms can face potential backlash, both in instances of over-moderation or under-moderation. It can be considered as censorship, often overburdening. It can also be considered as insufficient governance in cases where the level of moderation is not protecting the privacy rights of users.
- Another challenge is more in the technical realm, including the limitations of AI and algorithmic moderation in detecting nuanced misinformation. It holds out to the need for human oversight to sift through the misinformation that is created by AI-generated content.
Policy Approaches: Tackling Misinformation through Accountability and Future Outlook
Regulatory approaches to misinformation each present distinct strengths and weaknesses. Government-led regulation establishes clear standards but may risk censorship, while self-regulation offers flexibility yet often lacks accountability. The Indian framework, including the IT Act and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act of 2023, aims to enhance data-sharing oversight and strengthen accountability. Establishing clear definitions of misinformation and fostering collaborative oversight involving government and independent bodies can balance platform autonomy with transparency. Additionally, promoting international collaborations and innovative AI moderation solutions is essential for effectively addressing misinformation, especially given its cross-border nature and the evolving expectations of users in today’s digital landscape.
Conclusion
A balance between protecting free speech and safeguarding public interest is needed to navigate the legal risks of user-generated misinformation poses. As digital platforms like YouTube, Facebook, and Wikipedia continue to host vast amounts of user content, accountability measures are essential to mitigate the harms of misinformation. Establishing clear definitions and collaborative oversight can enhance transparency and build public trust. Furthermore, embracing innovative moderation technologies and fostering international partnerships will be vital in addressing this cross-border challenge. As we advance, the commitment to creating a responsible digital environment must remain a priority to ensure the integrity of information in our increasingly interconnected world.
References
- https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/should-digital-platform-owners-be-held-liable-for-user-generated-content/article68609693.ece
- https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/should-digital-platform-owners-be-held-liable-for-user-generated-content/article68609693.ece
- https://hbr.org/2021/08/its-time-to-update-section-230
- https://www.cnbctv18.com/information-technology/deepfakes-digital-india-act-safe-harbour-protection-information-technology-act-sajan-poovayya-19255261.htm
