Open Access Research Article
ISSUES, CONCERNS AND REGULATION OF FAKE NEWS: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
Published Paper
Article Details
ISSUES, CONCERNS AND REGULATION OF
FAKE NEWS: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
|
Ms. Vibhuti Tabiyar
3rd year student of
BALLB (Hons)
Seedling School of Law and
Governance
Jaipur National University, Jaipur
|
Dr. S. Krishnan
Associate Professor
Seedling School of Law and Governance
Jaipur National University, Jaipur
|
Abstract
“Fake news,” or
fabricated information that is patently false, has become a major phenomenon in
the context of Internet-based media. It has received serious attention in a
variety of fields, with scholars investigating the antecedents,
characteristics, and consequences of its creation and dissemination. As the
scourge of “fake news” continues to plague our information environment,
attention has turned toward devising automated solutions for detecting
problematic online content. But, in order to build reliable algorithms for
flagging “fake news,” we will need to go beyond broad definitions of the
concept and identify distinguishing features that are specific enough for
machine learning. With
the mushrooming of smartphone users and the easy access to the internet, fake
news is spreading at very high speed from people to people. Some are primarily interested in the nature of
misinformation contained in false news, so that we can better detect it and
distinguish it from real news. Others focus on the susceptibility of users—why
we fall for false news and how we can protect ourselves from this
vulnerability. Both are geared toward improving media literacy to protect
consumers from false information. Despite the fact that fake news is not
a new phenomenon, technological advances have constructed a fertile environment
for the fake news to be spread rapidly. Social media platforms, such as
Facebook, Twitter or YouTube, offer ground for generation and distribution of
fake news. Consequently, it is important to study the way social media
operates, how fake news is produced and spread through social network sites and
what is the role users play.
Keywords: Fake
News, Social Media, Misinformation, Damages
Introduction
“Sensationalism
always sold well. By the early 19th century, modern newspapers came on the
scene, touting scoops and exposés, but also fake stories to increase
circulation. The New York Sun’s 'Great Moon Hoax' of 1835
claimed that there was an alien civilization on the moon, and established the
Sun as a leading, profitable newspaper.”[1]
We all have entered a new world of
the media with a speed unheard of in human history. The current media
environment means not just the non-stop appearance and development of new media
platforms, products of convergence of traditional legacy media with the
internet and mobile telecommunications. The process is accompanied by the
revolutionary new approaches that media outlets should take towards the reader
and/or viewer, to their own finances and business models, to the
ever-increasing and louder than ever user-generated content, to gate-keeping
and news-aggregation. The media outlets have lost the ability to control the
public dissemination of information, and thus to set the public agenda. They
have lost the privilege of access to confidential sources who now fully use the
anonymity that internet provides, such as the “black boxes.” Today media tools
allow politicians and other individuals to bypass traditional media. For
example, through tweets, and investigative media blogs.
At least in the short perspective it
all leads to weakening of professional media entities and places heavier burden
on professional journalists. Thereby, bringing about an unlimited growth in
online media which does not necessarily adhere to professional standards of
journalism. That creates a situation when legitimate expressions of personal
views are merged with false or doctored information, hate campaigns against
individuals, often in a political context, with the objective of sewing
insecurity and fear that result in harming democratic political processes. The
advance of new forms of digital media, as was noted by the European Parliament,
have posed serious challenges for quality journalism. These challenges include
a decrease in critical thinking among audiences making them more susceptible to
disinformation and manipulation.[2]
The most recent developments in the dissemination models for media content,
mostly online, have brought about the notion of “fake news,” which subsequently
gained great currency in intergovernmental and national policies and regulation.
Some believe it is an old media
practice of disseminating “false information” that has been in existence since
the media was established and journalism became a profession.[3]
Others see it as a brand new threat and challenge to democracy and
international order. At the same time no general normative, institutional, and
judicial framework on how to deal with the phenomena behind the notion of “fake
news” has been found so far.
False and
distorted news material isn’t exactly a new thing. It’s been a part of media
history long before social media, since the invention of the printing press.
It’s what sells tabloids. On the internet, headline forms called clickbait entice
people to click to read more, by trying to shock and amaze us. What’s more
outrageous to read about than fake things that didn’t actually happen?
Fake news has existed since the dawn
of the printing press but in the age of internet and social media, it has found
a tremendous application. Manipulation of algorithms of social media and search
engines—to reach large audiences and mislead news consumers is a global trend
now. Fake video clips, news stories with morphed media logos, bots, paid
commentators for favourable online reputation (troll farm) have become very
common. Governments are using the threat of fake news to clamp down on free
speech. Globally, Snopes and in India Social Media Hoax Slayer, AltNews are
some forums which expose fake news. Editor of Postcard News (India) was
arrested for spreading falsehoods aimed at creating communal discord. Russia
has been accused of manipulating the 2016 US elections through bots and fake
news; it is a well-documented case of inter-national online manipulation.
Russian interference in elections in the US and West Europe has been the
biggest content manipulation concern in recent years. Facebook in the light of
mounting criticism in the wake of Cambridge Analytica data scandal has
announced that it will fight fake news and political misinformation, with new
controls intended to ensure authenticity and transparency among advertisers and
publishers.
History
There’s lots of examples of false
news throughout history. It played a role in catalyzing the Enlightenment, when
the Catholic Church’s false explanation of the 1755 Lisbon Earthquake prompted
Voltaire to speak out against religious dominance. The very first American
colonial newspaper ran a fake story about France’s Louis XIV.[4] In
the 1800s in the US, racist sentiment led to the publication of false stories
about African Americans’ supposed deficiencies and crimes. It was used by Nazi
propaganda machines to build anti-Semitic fervor.
In the 1890s, rival American
newspaper publishers Joseph Pulitzer and William Hearst competed over the
audience through sensationalism and reporting rumors as though they were facts,
a practice that became known at the time as “yellow journalism.” Their
incredulous news played a role in leading the US into the Spanish-American War
of 1898. Eventually there was a backlash against the lack of journalistic
integrity: The public demanded more objective and reliable news sources, which
created a niche that the The New York Times was established to
fill at the turn of the 20th century. Yellow journalism became
less common. That is, until the rise of web-based news brought it all back in
full force.
One of the motivations for 1890s
newspapers engaging in yellow journalism is the same as for fake news creators
today: Exaggerated news with shocking headlines gets attention and sells papers
(or prompts mouse-clicks), promoting the sale of advertising. In the form of
traditional news media, most people have learned better than to take outrageous
news articles as seriously as they did at the height of the yellow journalism
era. More recently, tabloids like The National Enquirer and The
New York Sun, and fad magazines like The Freak and The
Wet Dog are generally known as false news sources. Similarly, people
recognize that the parody news productions on the web and TV feature satire and
ironic, but unreal, accounts of current events.
But that clarity simply isn’t
available when news stories appear out-of-context via social media.
Of course, fake news is
also used as a term to discredit news stories that individuals (particularly
former president Donald Trump) don’t like, in order to suggest that they were
made up or that they blow out of proportion something that should be trivial
(even if other sources can verify their accuracy). In a conversation
with Fox Business in
October, 2017, Donald Trump claimed that he had "really started this whole
'fake news' thing." (Ironically, Hillary Clinton used the term in a speech
two days before Trump’s first use of the phrase[5].)
Although Donald Trump may have
appropriated the term in a whole new way, the term itself has been in use for
many years. The first documented uses of the term occurred in the 1890s,
according to Merriam Webster.[6]
The Scale of the Problem in India
Misinformation and disinformation
spread in media is becoming a serious social challenge. It is leading to the
poisonous atmosphere on the web and causing riots and lynchings on the road. In
the age of the internet (WhatsApp, Facebook, Twitter,) it is a serious problem
as rumours, morphed images, click-baits, motivated stories, unverified
information, planted stories for various interests spread easily among 35 crore
internet users in India. There have been many instances of online rumours
leading to killings of innocent people. In some cases, ministers have deleted
tweets after realizing the fake news which they shared earlier. In India,
WhatsApp is the platform most vulnerable to fake news. Millions of Indians (a
vast percentage is uneducated) using mobile internet innocently forwarding
‘good morning’ messages every day are seen as most vulnerable to fake news. In
the recent Karnataka Assembly elections (2018) fake news about rival parties
and candidates flooded the media. It may not be a coincidence that India has
the highest number of selfie deaths (person dying while trying to take a
selfie) in the world (76 deaths out of 127 reported globally between March 2014
and September 2016). Use and abuse of mobile and internet remain a concern.
Fake News Damages: Popular Examples from India
·
Muzzafarnagar
riots of 2013: fake video fuelled communal passions
·
UNESCO
has declared ‘Jana Gana Mana’ best national anthem in the world (WhatsApp)
·
Dawood
properties worth Rs 15000 Cr seized in Dubai (Zee News, ABP)
·
President
Kovind makes Twitter debut; gains 3 million followers in one hour (Republic,
Zee news, TOI etc.)
·
Nostradamus
had predicted the rise of supreme leader Narendus (Zee News)
·
Dying
Woman Molested, Video shows (The Hindu)
·
Fatwa
in Saudi Arabia; Men can eat wives when hungry (AajTak)
·
GPS
tracking nanochip in 2000 Rupee notes (Nov 2016)
·
Salt
Shortage rumours (Nov 2016)
·
Child
kidnapping rumours lead to lynchings by a mob in Jharkhand
·
Minister
using a Russian photo to show LED-electrification of streets
·
Ministry
of Home Affairs (MHA) annual report used a picture of Spain-Morocco border to
show Indian border floodlighting
·
Missing
JNU student Najeeb Ahmed has joined the ISIS
Categories of fake news:
Harmful fake
news: Following are examples of
fake news in India:
i)Dhule mob
lynching:A rumour was shared on social media in Dhule district
fake news on child-lifter gang:
A WhatsApp message was
disseminated stating that there is a child-lifter gang in the district.
Many people believed it to be
true. They saw some tribal
persons sitting together at a particular
place. People suspected that it
was a child-lifters gang and hence they lynched the
innocent persons. This
caused death of people
who were not
the members of any
child-lifters gang. The
same fake news trailed
in different parts
of India which caused
death of many
innocent persons in 2018-2019.
ii)Fake news
on train from
Bandra station to north
India during covid-19: During the
lockdown in India, fake
news was shared
about starting a train from Bandra station to north India.
Due to
this fake news,
thousands of migrant workers
had gathered at the
railway station which broke the law and order situation.
iii)Fake news on
Extension of lockdown:14 Fake
timetable about the extension of
lockdown was shared which
created the atmosphere
of fear and panic
among the migrant
workers in many parts
of India. They
walked thousands of kilometres to
their hometown with their families.The above fake
news resulted into
crime and harm to individuals[
including person society or state]
Non-harmful fake news:
Following are
few examples of
non-harmful fake news.
i). A Kumbh Mela
Preparation: Several images from Mecca were shared claiming it as
the arrangement for
Kumbh mela. Even though
it was fake
news, it did
not harm any person
or property. This news did
not harm in anyway to any
individual, organization, state and society.
ii). Fake news
on Blooming of Brahma Kamal
flower: During the lockdown, an
old video of
Brahma Kamal flower was shared with a caption that it
bloomed during lockdown as
there was less pollution in India. It was fake news
but it did not harm anyone.
iii) Gold chadar offered
by a devotee to Sai Baba Samadhi:
A false
image was shared claiming
that a devotee
offered a diamond-studded gold chadar to Sai Baba’s
shrine. Actually, no such thing
happened but it did not cause any harm to anyone.
After examining
these two categories, it can be concluded
that some fake
news is harmful which causes
harm or loss
to the person
or property or society.
On the contrary,
there are some examples
of fake news
which do not cause
any harm to
anyone by any
means. It is become necessary to prevent harmful fake
news to save lives
and property society
and state in effective
manner. It is necessary to protect various rights like
the right to
reputation, right to life &
personal liberty, and many other rights of people by lawful means. For that, there is a need for a law to curb
the menace of fake news.
Conceptual analysis and fake news
As far back as Socrates and Plato,
philosophers have tried to find concise definitions that help us to better
understand important concepts, such as justice, knowledge, and beauty. In line
with this tradition, a number of philosophers have recently proposed definitions
of fake news.[7]
As usual with conceptual analysis, we
would like a definition of fake news that agrees with our intuitions about
whether particular cases are or are not instances of fake news. For example,
the definition should count ‘Pope Endorses Trump’ as fake news, but should not
count ‘Dewey Defeats Truman’ as fake news. Also, we would like a definition
that can help us deal with the threat to knowledge and democracy posed by fake
news.[8] In
this paper, we propose a new definition of fake news. We argue that it
satisfies these two desiderata better than the previous proposals.
It should be noted at the outset that
carrying out a conceptual analysis of fake news is a particularly difficult task.
Indeed, a few philosophers have suggested that such a project is doomed to
failure.[9]
Unlike many other terms of philosophical interest, such as knowledge and lying,
fake news is a fairly new term. Moreover, what people take to be prototypical
instances of fake news has changed over time.[10] A
few years ago, the term fake news was more likely to be applied to satirical
news sources, such as the Daily Show and The Onion, than to fraudulent news
sources, such as the Denver Guardian. And even now, different people use the
term in apparently different and incompatible ways.[11]
Furthermore, Robert Talisse (2018) argues that the phenomenon of fake news is
so politically charged that we cannot agree on what counts as fake news.[12]
For instance, people of different political persuasions clearly disagree about
whether or not CNN is a source of fake news. Thus, we might worry that, in the
case of fake news, competent speakers of the language do not have the stable
and shared intuitions about cases that conceptual analysis requires.
Despite these difficulties, we think
that enough clear cases of fake news and non-fake news can be identified to
guide our conceptual analysis. Moreover, it is important to remember that the
goal of conceptual analysis is not simply to capture how people use a term.
That is just a means to an end. The goal here is to understand an actual
phenomenon in the world that clearly has important epistemological
implications. And, contra Joshua Habgood-Coote (2019), we argue that the
phenomenon of fake news is not adequately captured by existing epistemological
terminology, such as ‘lies, misleading, bullshitting, false assertion, false
implicature, being unreliable, distorting the facts, being biased, propaganda,
and so on.’[13]
Why does Fake News exist?
Fake news has become ubiquitous in
United States news cycles, and it exists because people make money through the
advertising on fake news articles. This isn’t new, however. According to
Humphrey, sensational and fake news stories have been used to sell newspapers
as far back as Jack the Ripper in the 19th century and a “hoax involving life
on the moon enraptured readers of The New York Sun in 1835.”[14]
In the era of Thomas Jefferson, political parties had their own newspapers and
it was up to the readers to decide for themselves what the truth was and what
was false.[15] Our
current news reports and the obligation of the reader to understand bias and
falsity and evaluate accordingly have come full circle.[16]
The current proliferation of fake
news online and on the air is motivated by money. Any click, even if only for a
moment, makes money; therefore, fake news creators are incentivized to create
fake news articles. It is the clicks and
the website/video views that fuel the money for fake news websites, so the more
outrageous and false the story, the more incentive there is for the author to
disregard the facts or truth of the story. Eventually, people started creating
fake news websites that, at first glance, look like credible news sources
and/or mimic the names of credible news sources to tempt more people to go to
the site and click on the stories. Fake news websites mushroomed during the
2016 United States Presidential election and many of those websites were
created in a “small city in Macedonia”. The phrase the “Macedonia teens” became
synonymous with fake news websites and stories, a verbal shorthand for the most
egregious examples of fake news. In this Macedonian town, “teenagers [were]
pumping out sensationalist stories to earn cash from advertising” and making
more money than they could have dreamed of before solely on fake news
websites. “A Macedonian teen is claiming
to have made at least $60,000 producing fake news in the past six months,
mostly by appealing to the supporters of Donald Trump.” This teen is just one of hundreds in
Macedonia who are making money in ad revenue through fake news websites.
Even more disturbing, there is no
incentive for anyone in Macedonia to stop the spread of fake news websites and
stories.[17] The
truth is that the city itself is getting rich from fake news.[18] The mayor, scolding a reporter, says, “There’s
no dirty money in [Macedonia],….before adding curiously that he is rather proud
of the entrepreneurs of his tiny little city, thousands of miles from the U.S.,
[who] have influenced the outcome of the American election.”[19] And as one of the teens noted, “[t]eenagers
in our city don't care how Americans vote, ... [t]hey are only satisfied that
they make money.”[20]
This “digital gold rush” in Macedonia is a problem for social media companies
like Facebook.[21] The
websites created there are pushing out plagiarized content, both real and fake,
aimed at getting U.S. political readers to use their sites, not necessarily to
influence elections or political views.[22]
These fake news sites are not limited to the “Macedonian teens” with plenty of
the same type of websites being created right here in the United States. All of
these websites started trending in Facebook, because Facebook is built to
engage its users. The truth or falsity
of the news didn't factor into Facebook’s algorithm.
The public is easily confused about
what is real news and what is fake news on many Internet websites due to the
blurred lines in vocabulary and format surrounding sponsored advertising. The
lines have become so skewed, that only those persons who have had media
literacy training, or are technologically savvy, can evaluate of news online
correctly.The prevalence of social media has enabled news of all kinds, even
when not real or not complete or false, to spread quickly and muddle true
journalism. Social media and Google make real news articles harder to find
because blogs, fake news websites, and other “suspect” news sites are usually
easier to find and easier to spread. Moreover, [w]e live in a sound-bite society.
There is no time to delve into news for lengthy explanations, because “the
nature of broadcast news is to focus on mostly providing information quickly,
in short chunks.”
Today's society has a short attention
span, which means many people are not hearing complete reporting and
explanations from MSM news. Many Americans are only watching fake news programs
or primarily entertainment programs as their only source for news. Programs
like The Daily Show, along with Fox News, MSNBC, talk radio, myriad blogs and
social networking site[s], have become significant sources of political
information. These MSM, radio and other fringe media sites have become common
for many people in the U.S., with viewer numbers usually organized by age. The Daily Show and The Colbert Report were
the media outlets for the younger generation and Fox News for the over 65
crowd. Political information no longer comes to us primarily from news
broadcasts or newspapers, nor are the myriad sources through which it does flow
clearly and consistently labeled.
Laws and Regulation to Curb Fake News in India
There is no specific law against fake
news in India. Free publication of news flows from Article 19 of the
Constitution guaranteeing freedom of speech.
·
Press
Council of India, a regulatory body, can warn, admonish or censure the
newspaper, the news agency, the editor or the journalist or disapprove the
conduct of the editor or the journalist if it finds that a newspaper or a news
agency has violated journalistic ethics.
·
News
Broadcasters Association (NBA) represents the private television news and
current affairs broadcasters. The self-regulatory body probes complaints
against electronic media.
·
Indian
Broadcast Foundation (IBF) also looks into the complaints against contents
aired by channels.
·
Broadcasting
Content Complaint Council (BCCC) admits complaints against TV broadcasters for
objectionable TV content and fake news.
·
Indian
Penal Code (IPC) has certain sections which could curb fake news: Sections 153
(wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot) and 295 (injuring or
defiling place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class) can
be invoked to guard against fake news.
·
Section
66 in The Information Technology Act, 2000: If any person, dishonestly or fraudulently,
does any act referred to in section 43 (damage to computer, computer system),
he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three
years or with fine which may extend to five lakh rupees or with both.
·
Civil
or Criminal Case for Defamation is another resort against fake news for
individuals and groups hurt by the fake news. IPC Section 499 (defamation) and
500 (whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a
term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both) provide for a
defamation suit.
Importance of Fighting Fake News, Alternative Facts,
and the Spread of Disinformation
It is critical that lawyers are
prepared to evaluate and combat fake news, alternative facts, and
disinformation campaigns. Their professional competence and ability to
effectively practice law is shaped by their ability to see through media
manipulation and bias.[23]
In addition to the everyday practice of law, lawyers and judges will be
standing in the front lines of the war on the media and the First Amendment as
officers of the court. The media literate attorney is going to be critical to
the defense of democracy and the Constitution.
Alternative facts are a fairly new
concept.[24] Attacks
on democracy and truth and justice are not new. Lawyers and judges must be
ready, and being media literate is only one weapon in the war against
disinformation and charges of fake news against the legitimate media. Authority
figures who spread fake news and disinformation to others are dangerous because
of the tendency of people to model “conformity, or social proof, by imitating
the behavior of other people.”[25]
This encourages groupthink where “[m]embers of the in-group have a stronger
feeling of group-safety compared with members of the out-group.”[26] This
feeling of safety in group conformity makes social media a space that
exacerbates disinformation and fake news spread by authority figures.
Facebook's Deputy General Counsel weighed in on this saying, “[t]here are
important economic and financial underpinning [fake news] that are just as
critical at getting to the bottom of as the technological questions.”[27]
Alternative facts and fake news are
the edge of an abyss, where society is watching the real-time amalgamation of “TV
news morph[ing] into infotainment and reality television.”[28]
News, especially cable news, has become the purview of “news personalities”
rather than journalists. News has become nothing more than “reporting what
experts on both sides think about events as sufficient to tell the “truth”
about events rather than undertaking more costly (and perhaps more off-putting
and less entertaining) investigative reporting characteristic of print
journalism. In the end, “the media left it up to the audience to choose what to
believe based on competing opinions, rather than on presentation of evidence.”
If we are not careful, soon we will have lost what it means to agree on facts,
and that is something that lawyers and judges must never let happen because the
consequences are too severe.[29]
Even the Pope has weighed in on fake news and the dangers of “spreading ...
disinformation online or in the traditional media”, calling it a “grave sin.”[30]
To heighten the absurdity, or alert
us to the grave danger of an alternative facts miasma, the Oxford dictionary chose
“post-truth” as its 2016 Word of the Year.[31]It
defined post-truth as “relating to denoting circumstances in which objective
facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and
personal belief.”[32]
The objective and mission of everyone in the legal community is to fight back
against a “post-truth” world before it overtakes our real world. It may be that
we have reached a point of no return, and there is no going back.'[33]
Lawyers, however, must be educated on how to recognize and evaluate facts,
media messages, and the implicit bias or objectivity of the media, remaining
the arbiters of truth in a “post-truth” world.[34]
Media literacy education is critical to this ability because it not an innate
talent.' Media literacy is a learned skill, similar to learning to analogize
facts to law.[35]
Things that Help, but Do Not Fix the Problem
The proliferation of fake news and
alternative facts have “inaugurated the golden age of fact-checkers-news sites
that expose public lies with well-crafted barrages of 'real' facts and data.”[36]
There have always been some attempts to stay ahead of fake news in the media,
but “[fact-checking is particularly challenging in the current era of ‘fake
news’, ‘alternative facts’, and gaslighting coming from the [U.S. government].”[37]
In the past, fact-checking was done by librarians or staff in newsrooms.[38]
Those who are fighting fake news are taking a new approach, however, creating
multiple fact-checking Internet websites, such as FactCheck.org, The Washington
Post's The Fact Checker, and PolitiFact.[39]
The ABA has created a “web-based fact-check service to help the public find
dependable answers to swirling and sometimes confusing legal questions.”[40]
The ABA’s service uses case law and statutes to combat fake legal news.[41]
As much as efforts to combat fake
news are out there, though, there are still many setbacks in the technological
giants that helped create the fake news proliferation.[42] “Nearly a year after Facebook and Google
launched offensives against fake news, they're still inadvertently promoting
it-often at the worst possible times.”[43] In
October 2017, the New York Times reported fact-checking websites contained fake
news ads, such as Politifact and Snopes, as recently as the week before.[44]
Only with sharp eyes and a complete understanding of the ways fake news
creators and media companies craft these misleading and false stories, can
people be prepared to evaluate the media messages for themselves.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The author has
provided following recommendations to combat the menace of fake news in India:
i.
Need to
have a regulatory body:
There is a need
to have a
dedicated body to
regulate fake news The Press
Council of India monitors the print media in India. It serves as a watchdog on
the press in India. The press is monitored in order to promote freedom of press
and to ensure that the standards and
ethics that must
be observed by the press are met.
Any aggrieved person can
approach it for
grievance redressal. In India,
such a statutory body is
required for social media
platforms which can
act as a watchdog on social media. It can also be
useful to promote ethics
and standard modes
of expression. This will help to reduce fake news. The aggrieved
person/company can easily approach it for grievance redressal.
It can also help to reduce
the burden of
the judiciary in cases relating to social media.
ii.
There is need
to explore technological solution
Central government to
establish a body of tech experts to explore tech solutions to fake news and
other cybercrimes.
iii.
Need of comprehensive definition:
At present, the existing
laws have not adequately defined the term ‘fake news’. If it is defined appropriately by the
legislature, the judiciary will be able to decide the cases relating to fake news. Countries like Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines, and
the U.K. have
adequately defined the term
in their special
laws and in a
special report on
fake news. Currently,
in the absence of
a comprehensive definition,
there is an ambiguity about the
term fake news.
iv.
Need to
have a special
law:
Currently, there
is no
special law dealing
with fake news in India. Some provisions of the IPC and
the IT Act are generally
used to deal
with cases relating to fake
news. Considering the impact of fake news such
as mob lynching, riots, internet shutdown, voting,
and defamation, it can be said that
rights like the
Right to Life
and Liberty, the Right
to Vote, the
Right to Reputation, and
the Right to
Information are commonly violated
by the people
at large. In order
to protect these
rights and to
prevent damage, there is either a need for a special law or an
amendment to the
existing provisions of the IPC and the IT Act in India.
v.
Need of
dedicated website/ portal:
The government must
start a portal,
website on which authentic
information about government measures and
other information shall
be provided.it should be
mandatory to use
this portal’s reference while citing any information on any media.
vi.
Need to
provide Due Diligence mechanism by
companies:
In order
to prevent offensive content,
social media companies must implement
some sort of
due diligence mechanism.
WhatsApp incorporated a forwarding feature into the content which is not
original. Such short-term
solutions must
be incorporated by the
tech companies. This
will help curbing the fake news.
vii.
Classify
fake news:
There is a need
to classify fake
news into harmful
and non-harmful fake
news under legislation.
In order to differentiate, punishment
and fine to be
imposed.
Conclusion: Education, Awareness, Regulation Needed
Fake news is often created and
circulated for gaining electoral currency and political gains. Often
government’s own party and agencies (through the undisclosed purchase of
political ads and IT cells) may be involved. It is a rising trend seen in many
countries led by China and Russia where internet manipulation and control is
very high. Any future legislation to curb fake news should take the whole
picture into account and not blame the media and go for knee-jerk reactions; in
this age of new media anyone can create and circulate new for undisclosed
benefits. Controlling fake news is a tricky issue: not controlling trolls could
lead to national and international instability while doing too much to control
it could harm democracy. Countering content manipulation and fake news to
restore faith in social media without undermining internet and media freedom
will require public education, strengthening of regulations and effort of tech
companies to make suitable algorithms for news curation. Italy, for example,
has experimentally added ‘recognizing fake news’ in school syllabus. India
should also seriously emphasize cybersecurity, internet education, fake news education
in the academic curriculum at all levels.
[1] J.
Soll, “The Long and Brutal History of Fake News,” POLITICO Magazine,
Dec. 18, 2016. http://politi.co/2FaV5W9 (accessed Jan. 02, 2023).
[2] See Resolution on EU Strategic
Communication to Counteract Propaganda Against it by Third Parties, EUR. PARL.
DOC. PV 23/11/2016 - 10.6 (2016).
[3] Robert G. Parkinson, Fake news?
That’s a Very Old Story., WASH. POST, Nov. 25, 2016,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/fake-news-thats-a-very-old-story/2016/
11/25/c8b1f3d4-b330-11e6-861652b15787add0_story.html?utm_term=.3497739aeb9d.
[4] Yeoman, “‘That’s
Fake News!,’” The Saturday Evening Post, Jul. 06, 2022. https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2022/07/thats-fake-news/ (accessed Jan. 06, 2023).
[5] M.
Wendling, “The (Almost) Complete History of ‘Fake News,’” BBC News,
Jan. 22, 2018. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-42724320 (accessed Jan. 02, 2023).
[6] Merriam-Webster,
“The Real Story of ‘Fake News,’” Mar. 23, 2017. https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/the-real-story-of-fake-news (accessed Jan. 02, 2023).
[7] Levy, Neil. 2017. “The Bad News
About Fake News.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 6: 20–36;
Rini, Regina. 2017. “Fake News and Partisan Epistemology.” Kennedy Institute of
Ethics Journal. https://kiej.georgetown.edu/fake-news-partisan-epistemology/;
Gelfert, Axel. 2018. “Fake News: A Definition.” Informal Logic 38: 84–117;
Mukerji, Nikil. 2018. “What is Fake News?” Ergo 5: 923–946; Jaster, Romy, and
David Lanius. 2018. “What is Fake News?” Versus 2: 207–227; Aikin, Scott F.,
and Robert B. Talisse. 2018. “On “Fake News”.” 3 Quarks Daily. https:// www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2018/05/on-fake-news.html.
[8] Gelfert, Axel. 2018. “Fake News: A
Definition.” Informal Logic 38: 84–117.
[9] Talisse, Robert B. 2018. “There’s
No Such Thing as Fake News (And That’s Bad News).” 3: AM Magazine. https://www.3ammagazine.com/3am/theres-no-such-thing-as-fakenews-and-thats-bad-news/;
Habgood-Coote, Joshua. 2019. “Stop Talking about Fake News!” Inquiry 62:
1033–1065
[10] Gelfert, Axel. 2018. “Fake News: A
Definition.” Informal Logic 38: 84–117.
[11] Habgood-Coote, Joshua. 2019. “Stop
Talking about Fake News!” Inquiry 62: 1033–1065.
[12] Talisse, Robert B. 2018. “There’s
No Such Thing as Fake News (And That’s Bad News).” 3: AM Magazine. https://www.3ammagazine.com/3am/theres-no-such-thing-as-fakenews-and-thats-bad-news/
[13] Habgood-Coote, Joshua. 2019. “Stop
Talking about Fake News!” Inquiry 62: 1033–1065.
[14] Joshua Humphrey, The Plague ofFake
News and the Intersection with Trademark Law, 8 CYBARIS AN. INTELL. PROP. L.
REV. 126, 133 (2017).
[15] Ibid.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Emma Jane Kirby, The City Getting
Rich from Fake News, BBC NEWS (Dec. 5, 2016),
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-38168281.
[18] Ibid.
[19] Ibid.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Max Read, Can Facebook Solve Its
Macedonian Fake-News Problem?, N.Y. MAG. (Nov. 4, 2016), http://nymag.com/selectall/2016/11
/can-facebook-solve-its-macedonian-fake-newsproblem.html.
[22] Ibid.
[23] Aaron Blake, Kellyanne Conway Says
Donald Trump's Team has 'Alternative Facts.' Which Pretty Much Says It All,
WASH. POST (Jan. 22, 2017), https://www.washingtonpost.com /news/the-fix/wp/2017/01/22/kellyanne-conway-says-donald-trumps-team-has-alternate-fact
s-which-pretty-much-says-it-all/?noredirect=on&utm term=.cab8 1 d437929.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Jan-Willem H. Bullee et al., The
Persuasion and Security Awareness Experiment: Reducing the Success of Social
Engineering Attacks, 11 J. ExP. CRIMINOLOGY 97, 97 (2015),
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/1 0.1 007%2Fs 1292-014-9222-7.pdf.
[26] Ibid.
[27] Ross Todd, Facebook Lawyer Details
'Fake News' Fight, RECORDER (July 20, 2017), https://wwi.law.com/therecorder/almlD/1
202793548492/Facebook-Lawyer-Details-FakeNews-Fight/?s1retum=20180506182425.
[28] Phillip N. Meyer, Alternative
Facts and the Law: Is Justice a Reality?, ABA J. (June 2017),
http://www.abajoumal.com/magazine/article/altemative facts-law-justicejreality.
[29] Ibid.
[30] Rosa Flores, Pope Warns Against
'Fake News' and Likens it to 'Crafty Serpent' in Genesis, CNN (Feb. 26, 2018),
https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/24/world/pope-condemnsfake-news/index.html; Paulina
Dedaj, Pope Criticizes 'Fake News, Calls it a 'Grave Sin', Fox NEWS (Dec. 18,
2017),
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/12/18/pope-criticizes-fakenews-calls-it-grave-sin.html.
[31] Gleb Tsipursky, Towards a Post-Lie
Future, HUMANIST (Feb. 21, 2017), https://thehumanist.com/magazine/march-april-2017/features/towards-post-lies-future.
[32] Ibid.
[33] Ibid.
[34] Ibid.
[35] Ibid.
[36] Mick O'Leary, Fact-Checkers Resist
Alternative Facts, QUESTIA (Oct. 2017),
https://www.questia.com/magazine/1Gl-507185452/fact-checkers-resist-alternative-facts
[37] Amrita Khal id, The Best Political
Fact-Checking Sites on the Internet, DAILY DOT (Sept. 21, 2016),
https://www.dailydot.com/layer8/best-fact-checking-websites/.
[38] Ibid.
[39] Ibid.
[40] ABA Rolls Out New Fact Check
Website to Help Separate Legal Fact From Fiction, ABA (Sept. 1, 2017),
https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2017/0 8/aba rolls
out newfa/
[41] Hilarie Bass, ABA Legal Fact Check
Sorts Fact from Fiction On Legal Issues, ABA J. (Jan. 2018),
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/aba_1egal-fact_check.
[42] Ibid.
[43] Fake News Ads are Reportedly
Popping Up On Fact-Checking Websites, Fox NEWS (Oct. 19, 2017),
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/10/19/fake-news-ads-are-reportedlypopping-up-on-fact-checking-websites.html.
[44] Ibid.
Article Information
ISSUES, CONCERNS AND REGULATION OF FAKE NEWS: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS
Authors: Ms. Vibhuti Tabiyar, Dr. S. Krishnan
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2023/09/20
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.