#FactCheck-Old Bengal Panchayat Poll Video Falsely Linked to 2026 Assembly Elections

Introduction

‍

Meta has announced that E2EE in Instagram direct messages is ending entirely. Every day, billions of people send messages they consider private. A medical update to a family member. A photograph meant for one person. A conversation they would never have in public. For years, end-to-end encryption (E2EE) was the technology that made that privacy possible: the digital equivalent of a sealed envelope that only the sender and receiver could open. After May 8, 2026, this will change. 

‍

Understanding the Adoption Gap

‍

Meta pointed to low user adoption as the reason for this change. Few people were using encrypted messaging on Instagram, the company said, so the feature was not worth keeping. That explanation raises some questions. Encryption was never switched on by default. Users had to find it and turn it on themselves. It was not advertised. And it was only available in certain regions to begin with, something Meta noted on its own Help Centre page. Features that require users to actively seek them out tend to get used far less than those that simply work from the start. WhatsApp demonstrates this clearly; encryption has been on by default since 2016, for every user, with no action required. Back in 2019, Mark Zuckerberg spoke publicly about building privacy into Meta’s messaging platforms as a core direction for the company.  The current decision shows a different vision for the company.

‍

The Commercial Dimension

‍

Encrypted message content is not accessible for advertising purposes by design. In December 2025, Meta updated its privacy policy to allow interactions with its Meta AI assistant to inform personalized advertising recommendations across its platforms. With encryption removed from Instagram direct messages, the content of those conversations enters a data environment that already serves Meta’s advertising systems. Meta has not made a direct public statement connecting these two decisions, but technology analysts and privacy researchers have noted the commercial implications of making previously inaccessible message content available within that ecosystem.

‍

What This Means for Users

‍

From May 8, 2026, the content of Instagram direct messages will be accessible to Meta’s systems. This includes messages relating to personal matters that users may have previously sent under the assumption of encryption. A related concern is the question of data security. Unencrypted message content stored on platform servers creates a larger surface area of sensitive information that could be exposed in the event of a security breach. As platforms collect and retain greater volumes of personal data, the potential consequences of unauthorised access grow correspondingly. 

But, there is an argument on the other side. Law enforcement agencies and child safety organisations have long maintained that end-to-end encryption limits their ability to detect and act on harmful content. Removing encryption does make certain forms of platform-level content moderation technically feasible where they were not before.

‍

India’s Supreme Court: The Warning Nobody Heeded

‍

India’s Supreme Court said it plainly when hearing the case against Meta’s 2021 WhatsApp privacy policy, which forced hundreds of millions of users to accept data sharing with Facebook or lose access entirely. Chief Justice Surya Kant called it “a decent way of committing theft of private information” and asked how ordinary people could meaningfully consent to policies written in language they cannot understand. He made it human with one line: “A poor woman selling fruits on the streets — will she understand the terms of your policy?” The court ordered Meta not to share a single word of user data until the case is resolved. When Meta’s lawyers argued that encryption protects users anyway, the bench pushed back: encryption protects message content, not the metadata surrounding it. Who you talk to, how often, at what time, from where: all of it is still harvested. The Competition Commission’s own advocate summarised the entire arrangement in four words: “We are the products.”

‍

WhatsApp: A Question Worth Asking

‍

Instagram, Messenger, and WhatsApp are three products inside one ecosystem, owned by Meta, serving one business model. Instagram’s encryption is already gone. Is WhatsApp next in line ?

WhatsApp has over 850 million monthly active users in India alone. People do not use it for entertainment, it is how families talk, how businesses run, how essential daily communication happens. It is infrastructure, not an app. Meta acquired it in 2014 promising no ads, no data exploitation. By 2021 that promise was already bending. By 2025 ads appeared in the Status section. Both original co-founders had long since left the company over exactly these concerns. Instagram’s encryption survived until it conflicted with revenue and regulation. WhatsApp’s encryption exists today under the same ownership, the same business model, and the same tightening global regulatory pressure. That is not a reason to panic. It is a reason to pay attention.

‍

Conclusion

‍

Encryption is not permanent. It is a design choice, and like any design choice, it can be undone when priorities shift. After May 8, 2026, Instagram direct messages will no longer be protected the way they once were. For most users, this change will pass unnoticed. But the data those conversations contain will now be accessible in ways it previously was not. What platforms do with user data is rarely announced loudly. Paying attention to the quiet changes matters.

‍

References 

‍

1. https://help.instagram.com/491565145294150
2. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/mar/18/instagram-to-remove-end-to-end-encryption-for-private-messages-in-may
3. https://www.androidpolice.com/why-meta-is-getting-rid-of-e2ee/
4. https://digitalpolicyalert.org/change/13307
5. https://www.skadden.com/insights/publications/2025/06/take-it-down-act
6. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/you-cant-play-with-right-of-privacy-of-citizens-scs-big-warning-to-whatsapp-meta-over-take-it-or-leave-it-policy/articleshow/127878524.cms#
7. https://proton.me/blog/instagram-end-to-end-encryption
8. https://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2018/09/26/exclusive-whatsapp-cofounder-brian-acton-gives-the-inside-story-on-deletefacebook-and-why-he-left-850-million-behind/

‍

Introduction

Misinformation poses a significant challenge to public health policymaking since it undermines efforts to promote effective health interventions and protect public well-being. The spread of inaccurate information, particularly through online channels such as social media and internet platforms, further complicates the decision-making process for policymakers since it perpetuates public confusion and distrust. This misinformation can lead to resistance against health initiatives, such as vaccination programs, and fuels scepticism towards scientifically-backed health guidelines.

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, misinformation surrounding healthcare largely encompassed the effects of alcohol and tobacco consumption, marijuana use, eating habits, physical exercise etc. However, there has been a marked shift in the years since. One such example is the outcry against palm oil in 2024: it is an ingredient prevalent in numerous food and cosmetic products, and came under the scanner after a number of claims that palmitic acid, which is present in palm oil, is detrimental to our health. However, scientific research by reputable institutions globally established that there is no cause for concern regarding the health risks posed by palmitic acid. Such trends and commentaries tend to create a parallel unscientific discourse that has the potential to not only impact individual choices but also public opinion and as a result, market developments and policy conversations. 

A prevailing narrative during the worst of the Covid-19 pandemic was that the virus had been engineered to control society and boost hospital profits. The extensive misinformation surrounding COVID-19 and its management and care increased vaccine hesitancy amongst people worldwide. It is worth noting that vaccine hesitancy has been a consistent trend historically; the World Health Organisation flagged vaccine hesitancy as one of the main threats to global health, and there have been other instances where a majority of the population refused to get vaccinated anticipating unverified, long-lasting side effects. For example, research from 2016 observed a significant level of public skepticism regarding the development and approval process of the Zika vaccine in Africa. Further studies emphasised the urgent need to disseminate accurate information about the Zika virus on online platforms to help curb the spread of the pandemic. 

In India during the COVID-19 pandemic, despite multiple official advisories, notifications and guidelines issued by the government and ICMR, people continued to remain opposed to vaccination, which resulted in inflated mortality rates within the country. Vaccination hesitancy was also compounded by anti-vaccination celebrities who claimed that vaccines were dangerous and contributed in large part to the conspiracy theories doing the rounds. Similar hesitation was noted in misinformation surrounding the MMR vaccines and their likely role in causing autism was examined.  At the time of the crisis, the Indian government also had to tackle disinformation-induced fraud surrounding the supply of oxygens in hospitals. Many critically-ill patients relied on fake news and unverified sources that falsely portrayed the availability of beds, oxygen cylinders and even home set-ups, only to be cheated out of money. 

The above examples highlight the difficulty health officials face in administering adequate healthcare. The special case of the COVID-19 pandemic also highlighted how current legal frameworks failed to address misinformation and disinformation, which impedes effective policymaking. It also highlights how taking corrective measures against health-related misinformation becomes difficult since such corrective action creates an uncomfortable gap in an individual’s mind, and it is seen that people ignore accurate information that may help bridge the gap. Misinformation, coupled with the infodemic trend, also leads to false memory syndrome, whereby people fail to differentiate between authentic information and fake narratives. Simple efforts to correct misperceptions usually backfire and even strengthen initial beliefs, especially in the context of complex issues like healthcare. Policymakers thus struggle with balancing policy making and making people receptive to said policies in the backdrop of their tendencies to reject/suspect authoritative action. Examples of the same can be observed on both the domestic front and internationally. In the US, for example, the traditional healthcare system rations access to healthcare through a combination of insurance costs and options versus out-of-pocket essential expenses. While this has been a subject of debate for a long time, it hadn’t created a large scale public healthcare crisis because the incentives offered to the medical professionals and public trust in the delivery of essential services helped balance the conversation. In recent times, however, there has been a narrative shift that sensationalises the system as an issue of deliberate “denial of care,” which has led to concerns about harms to patients.

Policy Recommendations

The hindrances posed by misinformation in policymaking are further exacerbated against the backdrop of policymakers relying on social media as a method to measure public sentiment, consensus and opinions. If misinformation about an outbreak is not effectively addressed, it could hinder individuals from adopting necessary protective measures and potentially worsen the spread of the epidemic. To improve healthcare policymaking amidst the challenges posed by health misinformation, policymakers must take a multifaceted approach. This includes convening a broad coalition of central, state, local, territorial, tribal, private, nonprofit, and research partners to assess the impact of misinformation and develop effective preventive measures. Intergovernmental collaborations such as the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology should be encouraged whereby doctors debunk online medical misinformation, in the backdrop of the increased reliance on online forums for medical advice. Furthermore, increasing investment in research dedicated to understanding misinformation, along with the ongoing modernization of public health communications, is essential. Enhancing the resources and technical support available to state and local public health agencies will also enable them to better address public queries and concerns, as well as counteract misinformation. Additionally, expanding efforts to build long-term resilience against misinformation through comprehensive educational programs is crucial for fostering a well-informed public capable of critically evaluating health information.

From an individual perspective, since almost half a billion people use WhatsApp it has become a platform where false health claims can spread rapidly. This has led to a rise in the use of fake health news. Viral WhatsApp messages containing fake health warnings can be dangerous, hence it is always recommended to check such messages with vigilance. This highlights the growing concern about the potential dangers of misinformation and the need for more accurate information on medical matters.

Conclusion

The proliferation of misinformation in healthcare poses significant challenges to effective policymaking and public health management. The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the role of misinformation in vaccine hesitancy, fraud, and increased mortality rates. There is an urgent need for robust strategies to counteract false information and build public trust in health interventions; this includes policymakers engaging in comprehensive efforts, including intergovernmental collaboration, enhanced research, and public health communication modernization, to combat misinformation. By fostering a well-informed public through education and vigilance, we can mitigate the impact of misinformation and promote healthier communities.

References

1. van der Meer, T. G. L. A., & Jin, Y. (2019), “Seeking Formula for Misinformation Treatment in Public Health Crises: The Effects of Corrective Information Type and Source” Health Communication, 35(5), 560–575. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2019.1573295 
2. “Health Misinformation”, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. https://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/priorities/health-misinformation/index.html 
3. Mechanic, David, “The Managed Care Backlash: Perceptions and Rhetoric in Health Care Policy and the Potential for Health Care Reform”, Rutgers University. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2751184/pdf/milq_195.pdf 
4. “Bad actors are weaponising health misinformation in India”, Financial Express, April 2024.

https://www.financialexpress.com/life/entertainment-bad-actors-are-weaponising-health-misinformation-in-india-3448871/ 

5. “Role of doctors in eradicating misinformation in the medical sector.”, Times of India, 1 July 2024. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/health-fitness/health-news/national-doctors-day-role-of-doctors-in-eradicating-misinformation-in-the-healthcare-sector/articleshow/111399098.cms 

‍

The World Wide Web was created as a portal for communication, to connect people from far away, and while it started with electronic mail, mail moved to instant messaging, which let people have conversations and interact with each other from afar in real-time. But now, the new paradigm is the Internet of Things and how machines can communicate with one another. Now one can use a wearable gadget that can unlock the front door upon arrival at home and can message the air conditioner so that it switches on. This is IoT.

WHAT EXACTLY IS IoT?

The term ‘Internet of Things’ was coined in 1999 by Kevin Ashton, a computer scientist who put Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chips on products in order to track them in the supply chain, while he worked at Proctor & Gamble (P&G). And after the launch of the iPhone in 2007, there were already more connected devices than people on the planet.

Fast forward to today and we live in a more connected world than ever. So much so that even our handheld devices and household appliances can now connect and communicate through a vast network that has been built so that data can be transferred and received between devices. There are currently more IoT devices than users in the world and according to the WEF’s report on State of the Connected World, by 2025 there will be more than 40 billion such devices that will record data so it can be analyzed.

IoT finds use in many parts of our lives. It has helped businesses streamline their operations, reduce costs, and improve productivity. IoT also helped during the Covid-19 pandemic, with devices that could help with contact tracing and wearables that could be used for health monitoring. All of these devices are able to gather, store and share data so that it can be analyzed. The information is gathered according to rules set by the people who build these systems.

APPLICATION OF IoT

IoT is used by both consumers and the industry.

Some of the widely used examples of CIoT (Consumer IoT) are wearables like health and fitness trackers, smart rings with near-field communication (NFC), and smartwatches. Smartwatches gather a lot of personal data. Smart clothing, with sensors on it, can monitor the wearer’s vital signs. There are even smart jewelry, which can monitor sleeping patterns and also stress levels.

With the advent of virtual and augmented reality, the gaming industry can now make the experience even more immersive and engrossing. Smart glasses and headsets are used, along with armbands fitted with sensors that can detect the movement of arms and replicate the movement in the game.

At home, there are smart TVs, security cameras, smart bulbs, home control devices, and other IoT-enabled ‘smart’ appliances like coffee makers, that can be turned on through an app, or at a particular time in the morning so that it acts as an alarm. There are also voice-command assistants like Alexa and Siri, and these work with software written by manufacturers that can understand simple instructions.

Industrial IoT (IIoT) mainly uses connected machines for the purposes of synchronization, efficiency, and cost-cutting. For example, smart factories gather and analyze data as the work is being done. Sensors are also used in agriculture to check soil moisture levels, and these then automatically run the irrigation system without the need for human intervention.

Statistics

• The IoT device market is poised to reach $1.4 trillion by 2027, according to Fortune Business Insight.
• The number of cellular IoT connections is expected to reach 3.5 billion by 2023. (Forbes)
• The amount of data generated by IoT devices is expected to reach 73.1 ZB (zettabytes) by 2025.
• 94% of retailers agree that the benefits of implementing IoT outweigh the risk.
• 55% of companies believe that 3^rd party IoT providers should have to comply with IoT security and privacy regulations.
• 53% of all users acknowledge that wearable devices will be vulnerable to data breaches, viruses,
• Companies could invest up to 15 trillion dollars in IoT by 2025 (Gigabit)

CONCERNS AND SOLUTIONS

• Two of the biggest concerns with IoT devices are the privacy of users and the devices being secure in order to prevent attacks by bad actors. This makes knowledge of how these things work absolutely imperative.
• It is worth noting that these devices all work with a central hub, like a smartphone. This means that it pairs with the smartphone through an app and acts as a gateway, which could compromise the smartphone as well if a hacker were to target that IoT device.
• With technology like smart television sets that have cameras and microphones, the major concern is that hackers could hack and take over the functioning of the television as these are not adequately secured by the manufacturer.
• A hacker could control the camera and cyberstalk the victim, and therefore it is very important to become familiar with the features of a device and ensure that it is well protected from any unauthorized usage. Even simple things, like keeping the camera covered when it is not being used.
• There is also the concern that since IoT devices gather and share data without human intervention, they could be transmitting data that the user does not want to share. This is true of health trackers. Users who wear heart and blood pressure monitors have their data sent to the insurance company, who may then decide to raise the premium on their life insurance based on the data they get.
• IoT devices often keep functioning as normal even if they have been compromised. Most devices do not log an attack or alert the user, and changes like higher power or bandwidth usage go unnoticed after the attack. It is therefore very important to make sure the device is properly protected.
• It is also important to keep the software of the device updated as vulnerabilities are found in the code and fixes are provided by the manufacturer. Some IoT devices, however, lack the capability to be patched and are therefore permanently ‘at risk’.

CONCLUSION

Humanity inhabits this world that is made up of all these nodes that talk to each other and get things done. Users can harmonize their devices so that everything runs like a tandem bike – completely in sync with all other parts. But while we make use of all the benefits, it is also very important that one understands what they are using, how it is functioning, and how one can tackle issues should they come up. This is also important to understand because once people get used to IoT, it will be that much more difficult to give up the comfort and ease that these systems provide, and therefore it would make more sense to be prepared for any eventuality. A lot of times, good and sensible usage alone can keep devices safe and services intact. But users should be aware of any issues because forewarned is forearmed.