#FactCheck: Viral video blast of fuel tank in UAE Al Hariyah Port portray as Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Introduction to Grooming

The term grooming is believed to have been first used by a group of investigators in the 1970s to describe patterns of seduction of an offender towards a child. It eventually evolved and began being commonly used by law enforcement agencies and has now replaced the term seduction for this behavioural pattern. At its core, grooming refers to conditioning a child by an adult offender to further their wrong motives. In its most popular sense, it refers to the sexual victimisation of children whereby an adult befriends a minor and builds an emotional connection to sexually abuse, exploit and even trafficking such a victim. The onset of technology has shifted the offline physical proximity of perpetrators to the internet, enabling groomers to integrate themselves completely into the victim’s life by maintaining consistent contact. It is noted that while grooming can occur online and offline, groomers often establish online contact before moving the ‘relationship’ offline to commit sexual offences.

Underreporting and Vulnerability of Teenagers

Given the elusive nature of the crime, cyber grooming remains one of the most underreported crimes by victims, who are often unaware or embarrassed to share their experiences. Teenagers are particularly more susceptible to cyber grooming since they not only have more access to the internet but also engage in more online risk-taking behaviours such as posting sensitive and personal pictures. Studies indicate that individuals aged 18 to 23 often lack awareness regarding the grooming process. They frequently engage in relationships with groomers without recognising the deceptive and manipulative tactics employed, mistakenly perceiving these relationships as consensual rather than abusive.

Rise of Cyber Grooming incidents after COVID-19 pandemic

There has been an uptick in cyber grooming after the COVID-19 pandemic, whereby an adult poses as a teenager or a child and befriends a minor on child-friendly websites or social media outlets and builds an emotional connection with the victim. The main goal is to obtain intimate and personal data of the minor, often in the form of sexual chats, pictures or videos, to threaten and coerce them into continuing such acts. The grooming process usually begins with seemingly harmless inquiries about the minor's age, interests, and family background. Over time, these questions gradually shift to topics concerning sexual experiences and desires. Research and data indicate that online grooming is primarily carried out by males, who frequently choose their victims based on attractiveness, ease of access, and the ability to exploit the minor's vulnerabilities. 

Beyond Sexual Exploitation: Ideological and Commercial Grooming

Grooming is not confined to sexual exploitation. The rise of technology has expanded the influence of extremist ideological groups, granting them access to children who can be coerced into adopting their beliefs. This phenomenon, known as ideological grooming, presents significant personal, social, national security, and law enforcement challenges. Additionally, a new trend, termed digital commercial grooming, involves malicious actors manipulating minors into procuring and using drugs. Violent extremists are improving their online recruitment strategies, learning from each other to target and recruit supporters more effectively and are constantly leveraging children’s vulnerabilities to reinforce anti-government ideologies.

Policy Recommendations to Combat Cyber Grooming

To address the pervasive issue of cyber grooming and child recruitment by extremist groups, several policy recommendations can be implemented. Social media and online platforms should enhance their monitoring and reporting systems to swiftly detect and remove grooming behaviours. This includes investing in AI technologies for content moderation and employing dedicated teams to respond to reports promptly. Additionally, collaborative efforts with cybersecurity experts and child psychologists to develop educational campaigns and tools that teach children about online safety and identify grooming tactics should be mandated. Legislation should also be strengthened to include provisions specifically addressing cyber grooming, ensuring strict penalties for offenders and protections for victims. In this regard, international cooperation among law enforcement agencies and tech companies is essential to create a unified approach to tackling cross-border online threats to children's safety and security.

References:

1. Lanning, Kenneth “The Evolution of Grooming: Concept and Term”, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 2018, Vol. 33 (1) 5-16. https://www.nationalcac.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/The-evolution-of-grooming-Concept-and-term.pdf 
2. Jonie Chiu, Ethel Quayle, “Understanding online grooming: An interpretative phenomenological analysis of adolescents' offline meetings with adult perpetrators”, Child Abuse & Neglect, Volume 128, 2022, 105600, ISSN 0145-2134,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2022.105600. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014521342200120X 
3. “Online child sexual exploitation and abuse”, Sharinnf Electronic Resources on Laws and Crime, United Nations Office for Drugs and Crime. https://sherloc.unodc.org/cld/en/education/tertiary/cybercrime/module-12/key-issues/online-child-sexual-exploitation-and-abuse.html 
4. Mehrotra, Karishma, “In the pandemic, more Indian children are falling victim to online grooming for sexual exploitation” The Scroll.in, 18 September 2021. https://scroll.in/magazine/1005389/in-the-pandemic-more-indian-children-are-falling-victim-to-online-grooming-for-sexual-exploitation 
5. Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria, “Digital Grooming: Discourses of Manipulation and Cyber-Crime”, 18 December 2022 https://academic.oup.com/book/45362
6. Strategic orientations on a coordinated EU approach to prevention of radicalisation in 2022-2023 https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2022-03/2022-2023%20Strategic%20orientations%20on%20a%20coordinated%20EU%20approach%20to%20prevention%20of%20radicalisation_en.pdf 
7. “Handbook on Children Recruited and Exploited by Terrorist and Violent Extremist Groups: The Role of the Justice System”, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2017. https://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-reform/Child-Victims/Handbook_on_Children_Recruited_and_Exploited_by_Terrorist_and_Violent_Extremist_Groups_the_Role_of_the_Justice_System.E.pdf 

‍

Introduction

Conversations surrounding the scourge of misinformation online typically focus on the risks to social order, political stability, economic safety and personal security. An oft-overlooked aspect of this phenomenon is the fact that it also takes a very real emotional and mental toll on people. Even as we grapple with the big picture questions about financial fraud or political rumors or inaccurate medical information online, we must also appreciate the fact that being exposed to misinformation and becoming aware of one’s own vulnerability are both significant sources of mental stress in today’s digital ecosystem.

Inaccurate information causes confusion and worry, which has negative consequences for mental health. Misinformation may also impair people's sense of well-being by undermining their trust in institutions, authority figures, and their own judgment. The constant bombardment of misinformation can lead to information overload, wherein people are unable to discriminate between legitimate sources and misleading content, resulting in mental exhaustion and a sense of being overwhelmed by the sheer volume of information available. Vulnerable groups such as children, the elderly, and those with pre-existing health conditions are more sensitive or susceptible to the negative effects of misinformation.

How Does Misinformation Endanger Mental Health?

Misinformation on social media platforms is a matter of public health because it has the potential to confuse people, lead to poor decision-making and result in cognitive dissonance, anxiety and unwanted behavioural changes.

Unconstrained misinformation can also lead to social disorder and the prevalence of negative emotions amongst larger numbers, ultimately causing a huge impact on society. Therefore, understanding the spread and diffusion characteristics of misinformation on Internet platforms is crucial.

The spread of misinformation can elicit different emotions of the public, and the emotions also change with the spread of misinformation. Factors such as user engagement, number of comments, and time of discussion all have an impact on the change of emotions in misinformation. Active users tend to make more comments, engage longer in discussions, and display more dominant negative emotions when triggered by misinformation. Understanding the evolution pattern of emotions triggered by misinformation is also important in view of the public’s emotional fluctuations under the influence of misinformation, and social media often magnifies the impact of emotions and makes emotions spread rapidly in social networks. For example, the sentiment of misinformation increases when there are sensitive topics such as political elections, viral trending topics, health-related information, communal and local information, information about natural disasters and more. Active misinformation on the Internet not only affects the public's psychology, mental health and behavior, but also has an impact on the stability of social order and the maintenance of social security.

Prebunking and Debunking To Build Mental Guards Against Misinformation

As the spread of misinformation and disinformation rises, so do the techniques aimed to tackle their spread. Prebunking or attitudinal inoculation is a technique for training individuals to recogniseand resist deceptive communications before they can take root. Prebunking is a psychological method for mitigating the effects of misinformation, strengthening resilience and creating cognitive defenses against future misinformation. Debunking provides individuals with accurate information to counter false claims and myths, correcting misconceptions and preventing the spread of misinformation. By presenting evidence-based refutations, debunking helps individuals distinguish fact from fiction.

What do health experts say about online misinformation?

“In the21st century, mental health is crucial due to the overwhelming amount of information available online. The COVID-19 pandemic-related misinformation was a prime example of this, with misinformation spreading online, leading to increased anxiety, panic buying, fear of leaving home, and mistrust in health measures. To protect our mental health, it is essential to cultivate a discerning mindset, question sources, and verify information before consumption. Fostering a supportive community that encourages open dialogue and fact-checking can help navigate the digital information landscape with confidence and emotional support. Prioritising self-care routines, mindfulness practices, and seeking professional guidance are also crucial for safeguarding mental health in the digital information era.”

In conversation with CyberPeace ~ Says Dubai-based psychologist, Aishwarya Menon, (BA,in Psychology and Criminology from the University of Westen Ontario, London and MA in Mental Health and Addictions (Humber College, University of Guelph),Toronto.

CyberPeace Policy Recommendations:

1)     Countering misinformation is everyone's shared responsibility. To mitigate the negative effects of infodemics online, we must look at developing strong legal policies, creating and promoting awareness campaigns, relying on authenticated content on mass media, and increasing people's digital literacy.

2)     Expert organisations actively verifying the information through various strategies including prebunking and debunking efforts are among those best placed to refute misinformation and direct users to evidence-based information sources. It is recommended that countermeasures for users on platforms be increased with evidence-based data or accurate information.

3)     The role of social media platforms is crucial in the misinformation crisis, hence it is recommended that social media platforms actively counter the production of misinformation on their platforms. Local, national, and international efforts and additional research are required to implement the robust misinformation counterstrategies.

4)     Netizens are advised or encouraged to follow official sources to check the reliability of any news or information. They must recognise the red flags by recognising the signs such as questionable facts, poorly written texts, surprising or upsetting news, fake social media accounts and fake websites designed to look like legitimate ones. Netizens are also encouraged to develop cognitive skills to discern fact and reality. Netizens are advised to approach information with a healthy dose of skepticism and curiosity.

Final Words:

It is crucial to protect mental health by escalating and disturbing the rise of misinformation incidents on various subjects, safeguarding our minds requires cognitive skills, building media literacy and verifying the information from trusted sources, prioritising mental health by self-care practices and staying connected with supportive authenticated networks. Promoting prebunking and debunking initiatives is necessary. Netizen scan protect themselves against the negative effects of misinformation and cultivate a resilient mindset in the digital information age.

References:

1. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/scn/2021/7999760/
2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8502082/

‍

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