#FactCheck: An image shows Sunita Williams with Trump and Elon Musk post her space return.

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/ 

Introduction

Misinformation regarding health is sensitive and can have far-reaching consequences. These include its effect on personal medical decisions taken by individuals, lack of trust in conventional medicine, delay in seeking treatments, and even loss of life. The fast-paced nature and influx of information on social media can aggravate the situation further. Recently, a report titled Health Misinformation Vectors in India was presented at the Health of India Summit, 2024. It provided certain key insights into health-related misinformation circulating online.

The Health Misinformation Vectors in India Report

The analysis was conducted by the doctors at First Check, a global health fact-checking initiative alongside DataLEADS, a Delhi-based digital media and technology company. The report covers health-related social media content that was posted online from October 2023 to November 2024. It mentions that among all the health scares, misinformation regarding reproductive health, cancer, vaccines, and lifestyle diseases such as diabetes and obesity is the most prominent type that is spread through social media. Misinformation regarding reproductive health includes illegal abortion methods that often go unchecked and even tips on conceiving a male child, among other things. 

In order to combat this misinformation, the report encourages stricter regulations regarding health-related content on digital media, inculcating technology for health literacy and misinformation management in public health curricula and recommending tech platforms to work on algorithms that prioritise credible information and fact-checks. Doctors state that people affected by life-threatening diseases are particularly vulnerable to such misinformation, as they are desperate to seek options for treatment for themselves and their family members to have a chance at life. In a diverse society, with the lack of clear and credible information, limited access to or awareness about tools that cross-check content, and low digital literacy, people gravitate towards alternate sources of information which also fosters a sense of disengagement among the public overall. The diseases mentioned in the report, which are prone to misinformation, are life-altering and require attention from healthcare professionals. 

CyberPeace Outlook

Globally, there are cases of medically-unqualified social media influencers who disperse false/mis- information regarding various health matters. The topics covered are mostly associated with stigma and are still undergoing research. This gap allows for misinformation to be fostered. An example is misinformation regarding PCOS( Polycystic Ovary Syndrome) which is circulating online.

In the midst of all of this, YouTube has released a new feature that aligns with combating health misinformation, trying to bridge the gap between healthcare professionals and Indians who look for trustworthy health-related information online. The initiative includes a feature that allows doctors, nurses, and other healthcare professionals to sign up for a health information source license. This would help by labeling all their informative videos, as addressed- from a healthcare professional. Earlier, this feature was available only for health organisations including a health source information panel and health content shelves, but this step broadens the scope for verification of licenses of individual healthcare professionals. 

As digital literacy continues to grow, methods of seeking credible information, especially regarding sensitive topics such as health, require a combined effort on the part of all the stakeholders involved. We need a robust strategy for battling health-related misinformation online, including more awareness programmes and proactive participation from the consumers as well as medical professionals regarding such content.

References

1. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/misinformation-about-cancer-reproductive-health-is-widespread-in-india-impacting-medical-decisions-says-report/articleshow/115931612.cms
2. https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/cancer-misinformation-prevalent-in-india-trust-in-medicine-crucial-report-7165458
3. https://www.newindian.in/ai-driven-health-misinformation-poses-threat-to-indias-public-health-report/
4. https://www.etvbharat.com/en/!health/youtube-latest-initiative-combat-health-misinformation-india-enn24121002361
5. https://blog.google/intl/en-in/products/platforms/new-ways-for-registered-healthcare-professionals-in-india-to-reach-people-on-youtube/
6. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckgz2p0999yo

Executive Summary:

Viral pictures featuring US Secret Service agents smiling while protecting former President Donald Trump during a planned attempt to kill him in Pittsburgh have been clarified as photoshopped pictures. The pictures making the rounds on social media were produced by AI-manipulated tools. The original image shows no smiling agents found on several websites. The event happened with Thomas Mathew Crooks firing bullets at Trump at an event in Butler, PA on July 13, 2024. During the incident one was deceased and two were critically injured. The Secret Service stopped the shooter, and circulating photos in which smiles were faked have stirred up suspicion. The verification of the face-manipulated image was debunked by the CyberPeace Research Team.

Claims:

Viral photos allegedly show United States Secret Service agents smiling while rushing to protect former President Donald Trump during an attempted assassination in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Fact Check:

Upon receiving the posts, we searched for any credible source that supports the claim made, we found several articles and images of the incident but in those the images were different. 

This image was published by CNN news media, in this image we can see the US Secret Service protecting Donald Trump but not smiling. We then checked for AI Manipulation in the image using the AI Image Detection tool, True Media.

We then checked with another AI Image detection tool named, contentatscale AI image detection, which also found it to be AI Manipulated.

Comparison of both photos:

‍

‍

Hence, upon lack of credible sources and detection of AI Manipulation concluded that the image is fake and misleading.

Conclusion:

The viral photos claiming to show Secret Service agents smiling when protecting former President Donald Trump during an assassination attempt have been proven to be digitally manipulated. The original image found on CNN Media shows no agents smiling. The spread of these altered photos resulted in misinformation. The CyberPeace Research Team's investigation and comparison of the original and manipulated images confirm that the viral claims are false.

• Claim: Viral photos allegedly show United States Secret Service agents smiling while rushing to protect former President Donald Trump during an attempted assassination in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
• Claimed on: X, Thread
• Fact Check: Fake & Misleading