Deep-fakes Unveiled

In the age of rapid technological advancements, the emergence of deep-fakes has created both admiration and concern. So, what exactly are deep fakes?

Deep-fakes utilize artificial intelligence techniques to create realistic synthetic media, and present a significant challenge in the realm of disinformation and propaganda. In this article we will delve into the intricacies of deep-fakes, exploring their creation process and equipping professionals with valuable insights on detecting deep-fakes in propaganda.

Deep-fakes refer to manipulated audio, video, or image content that convincingly replaces the original subject with synthesized and software created elements. Using machine learning algorithms, deep-fakes can replicate facial expressions, gestures, and voices, making it increasingly difficult to distinguish the real content from fabricated media.

The Deepfake Creation Process:

a. Data Collection: Creating deep-fake starts with collecting vast amounts of data, typically involving photographs or videos of the target person.

b. Pre-processing: The collected data is processed to isolate the target person's face, enhancing it for subsequent analysis.

c. Neural Network Training: Deep-fake algorithms utilize deep neural networks to learn the unique features and characteristics of the target person's face.

d. Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs): GANs consist of two neural networks—an encoder and a decoder—working in tandem to generate realistic synthetic media. The encoder extracts the target person's facial features, while the decoder generates the final synthetic content.

e. Refinement: The generated synthetic media is refined iteratively, improving the quality and realism through repeated training cycles.

Spotting Deep-fakes in Propaganda:

a. Visual Anomalies: Deep-fakes may exhibit subtle visual irregularities, such as unnatural movements, inconsistent lighting, or mismatched reflections.

b. Facial Inconsistencies: Pay close attention to minor facial details like blinking, facial hair, or facial proportions that may appear unnatural or distorted.

c. Audio Discrepancies: Deep-fakes may introduce audio artifacts or inconsistencies, such as lip-syncing issues or subtle audio glitches.

d. Unusual Context or Behavior: Deep-fake(s) embedded in propaganda often aim to manipulate public opinion. Be cautious of narratives that seem out of character or employ extreme perspectives without sufficient evidence.

e. Metadata and Source Verification: Verify the source of the media by examining metadata, timestamps, and cross-referencing with other reliable sources to establish authenticity.

Deepfake Mitigation Techniques:

a. Advances in Ai Detection: Researchers are developing sophisticated deep-fake detection algorithms that leverage machine learning and computer vision techniques to identify anomalies and artifacts indicative of deep-fake(s).

b. Digital Watermarking and Authentication: Embedding invisible watermarks or cryptographic signatures into media content can facilitate its authentication and traceability.

c. Media Literacy and Education: Raising awareness about deep-fakes and educating the public can empower individuals to critically evaluate media sources and question the veracity of information.

Leaders in Government, politicians, high-profile industrialists and other global influencers have to realize that deep-fakes pose a significant challenge where there might disinformation and propaganda connected to them and their organizations, leading to distrust among their supporters (for politicians) and investors & customers (for industrialists and influencers).   Understanding the creation process behind deep-fakes and being equipped with effective detection techniques are crucial for everybody in combating the potential risks associated with synthetic media. By remaining vigilant, leveraging advanced detection technologies, and promoting media literacy, we can navigate the complex landscape of deep-fakes and protect the integrity of all types of information in the digital age.

 

 

The hidden enemies of India – the foreign media.

Facing enemies across our nation’s borders is an everyday affair for the Indian governments, over the last 75 years. These enemies are conspicuous and have an overt intension of fighting our country for their beliefs. But now we face a new enemy in the form of foreign media outlets who spread malicious lies, misinformation and fake new.

The leading news agency in this war against India is the Thomson Reuters corporation based in Toronto, Canada. Reuters has an interesting past. It was founded by German born Paul Reuter who worked at a book-publishing firm in Berlin and was involved in distributing radical pamphlets at the beginning of the ‘Revolutions of 1848’ which were a series of political upheavals throughout Europe that started that year. It remains the most widespread revolutionary wave in European history to date.

In its current form, where Reuters is a part of the Thomson media group, its anti-establishment behavior has not changed. This media company refuses to call terrorists as ‘terrorists’, as part of its “value – neutral values”, which basically means that it has no values to adhere to.

New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman rebuked Thomson Reuters for selling access to key economic survey data two seconds early to high-frequency algorithmic traders. The story strongly suggested that some Thomson Reuters customers were using their two-second head start (an eternity in the modern world of computerized trading) to front-run the markets.

From being accused for working with Western Intelligence agencies to promote their governments agendas across the world, to being sued for breach of contract by its employees, this company has been in a number of controversies. The Thomson family itself is full of controversies, hidden away behind a wall of legality. Theirs is a world where trust is illusive, motives are suspect and opportunists abound. Relationships are mediated by lawyers, litigation chisels away at personal relationships, private lives are defined as "exclusive property" in confidentiality agreements.

In the spring of 2003, a grand jury in USA called in a probe of a private detective named Anthony Pellicano who allegedly was involved in spying activities on behalf of a Thomson family member. It was not the first time the Los Angeles private detective's name had surfaced in relation to Thomson's legal disputes. Pellicano first provided aid to Taylor Thomson (heir to the Thomson Corporation’s fortune) in early 2002, and the indictment suggests he continued working on her case over the ensuing months. In late 2002, FBI agents raided the offices of Pellicano and uncovered a cache of illegal explosives. Pellicano later pleaded guilty to these charges and was sentenced to 30 months in jail. But what investigators also unearthed in the detective's offices were transcripts of recorded conversations, tapes and computer files, which led to an intense investigation. Pellicano now faces charges connected to a vast espionage operation, whose targets may have included Thomson's legal adversaries.

This private detective and some of his clients are said to have used illegally gathered information to secure "a tactical advantage in litigation by learning their opponents' plans, strategies, perceived strengths and weaknesses, settlement positions, and other confidential information."

In 2020, Reuters announced that it was mobilizing and expanding its fact-checking unit to fight misinformation on social media, but was itself spreading misinformation on a regular basis. In August 2022, Reuters had been accused by the Government of Turkey for targeting that country by publishing misleading and fake news.

On June 9, 2020, three Reuters journalists Jack Stubbs, Raphael Satter, and Christopher Bing personally visited India, and incorrectly used the image of an Indian herbal medicine entrepreneur in an exclusive story titled: "Obscure Indian cyber firm spied on politicians, investors worldwide". Raphael Satter initially claimed that they had mistaken the man for the suspected hacker Sumit Gupta because both men share the same business address. A check by local media however showed that both men were in different buildings and not as claimed by Raphael Satter. The prominent investigative journalist later acknowledged that the false story was published without proper investigation with the purpose to spice up the tale.

Thomson Reuters as an organization never accepts its role in the spread of fake and misleading news. In 2018, it ran a “poll” that ranked India as the most dangerous in the world for women. When challenged by Indian journalists; Belinda Goldsmith, editor-in-chief of the Thomson Reuters foundation stated that the report was “not based on Data but on perception”, and that it was researched with a sample of 548 responses in a country of 1.3 billion people.  Goldsmith never acknowledged this story as fake, nor did Reuters apologize for publishing an untrue and misleading story.

In October 2022, in a propaganda piece published in 'Context' (a media platform run by Thomas Reuters Foundation), its journalist Rina Chandran alleged that disinformation, which supposedly originated in India, was the cause of Hindu-Muslim unrest in Leicester city in England’s East Midlands region. Rina Chandran has a history of peddling fake news. For years now, Chandran has been using social media platforms to vilify India and make false allegations. In April this year, Chandran resorted to scaremongering and spreading fake news alleging that Hindu goons in India were destroying Muslim livelihoods, but without providing any evidence to prove her claims.

When caught, the usual defense of Thomson Reuters is that they are a “wire service” that compiles reports from across the globe and forwards these reports to its consumers in an “unbiased” manner, thereby putting the onus of responsibility onto the reporters. In reality however, Thomson Reuters promotes news from leftist–liberal reporters, in a manner that barely keeps it from stepping into the domain of fake news, but firmly within the domain of misrepresented news; which they later either withdraw or issue corrections upon; after the required damage has been done.

Reuters mostly targets countries in Asia as part of the North American – British – European propaganda. It pretends to be an upstanding organization that promotes high ethical standards against corruption and calls itself a defender of human rights; while ignoring the fact that politicians in Europe have caught indulging in massive corruption, and those in North America are frequently abusing the rights of their own citizens.

In conclusion, any news from Thomson Reuters has to be considered as fake and anti–India propaganda, without any reservations whatsoever.

 

 

<script async src="https://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js?client=ca-pub-1827088090084063"
     crossorigin="anonymous"></script>

Scams of the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation)

To listen to this article click the link...  

A well-known British voice actor; Norman Shelley's voice was used to broadcast some of the most important words in modern British history - including 'We shall fight them on the beaches'. It is marked 'BBC, Churchill: Speech. Artist Norman Shelley' and stamped 'September 7, 1942'.

It would be difficult to list all the controversies that the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has been involved in since its inception, as there have been many. Some notable ones include:

·         The Jimmy Savile scandal: In 2012, the BBC was criticized for its handling of child sexual abuse allegations against the late BBC presenter Jimmy Savile. The scandal led to the resignation of several senior BBC executives, and an independent review found that the broadcaster had a "deferential culture" that allowed Savile to abuse victims on BBC premises for decades.

·         The Newsnight scandal: In 2012, the BBC's Newsnight program was criticized for cancelling an investigation into child sexual abuse allegations against Jimmy Savile. The decision was later revealed to have been made by the then-editor of the program, Peter Rippon, without consulting senior management. The fallout from the scandal led to the resignation of several senior BBC executives, including then-Director General George Entwistle.

·         The Panorama-Princess Diana scandal: In 1995, the BBC's Panorama program aired an interview with Princess Diana in which she made a number of personal revelations about her marriage and the royal family. The interview, which was conducted by journalist Martin Bashir, was criticized for its unethical tactics, including the use of fake bank statements to gain Diana's trust.

·         The Hutton Inquiry: In 2003, the BBC was criticized for its coverage of the Iraq War, specifically the death of weapons expert David Kelly. The broadcaster reported that the government had "sexed up" a dossier on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction to justify the war, but the subsequent Hutton Inquiry found that the BBC's reporting was "unfounded" and that the broadcaster had failed to follow its own editorial guidelines.

·         The Gender Pay Gap Scandal: In 2017, the BBC was criticized for its gender pay gap, with some accusing the broadcaster of paying female employees less than male employees for the same work. The scandal prompted the BBC to publish the salaries of its top earners, revealing a large disparity between the salaries of men and women.

·         In the 1980s, the BBC faced controversy over the airing of a documentary called "Real Lives: At Death's Door," which depicted terminally ill patients in a hospice. Some viewers and healthcare professionals deemed it exploitative and in poor taste.

The BBC is known for being deceitful and corrupt right from its inception. As former Prime Minister Winston Churchill publicly stated in 1954, "I am against the monopoly enjoyed by the BBC. For eleven years they kept me off the air. They prevented me from expressing views which have proved to be right. Their behavior has been tyrannical. They are honeycombed with Socialists—probably with Communists".

The seeds of BBC’s unholy alliance with the British Foreign Office is not new. In 1969, Reuters agreed to open a reporting service in the Middle East as part of a British Foreign Office plan to influence the international media. In order to protect the reputation of Reuters, which may have been damaged if the funding from the British government became known, the BBC paid Reuters “enhanced subscriptions” for access to its news service, and was in turn compensated by the British government for the extra expense. The BBC paid Reuters £350,000 over four years under the plan.

On 30 January 2011, the BBC broadcast an episode of its motoring TV show Top Gear during which presenters referred to Mexicans as both "lazy" and "feckless" and Mexican food as "refried sick". The broadcast caused many complaints in Mexico, including in newspapers and websites, while a motion of censure was considered in the Mexican senate. Jeremy Clarkson, one of the presenters, expressed doubt that there would be any complaints against them as, he alleged, the Mexican ambassador would be asleep. British MPs described the comments as "ignorant, derogatory and racist" and called on the BBC to say it was sorry. The BBC then offered an apology, though it claimed there was no "vindictiveness" in the remarks and that they were just part of the stereotype-based comedy the organisation espoused, such as when it "make[s] jokes about the Italians being disorganised and over dramatic, the French being arrogant and the Germans being over-organised". Even in its apology, the BBC managed to insult three European nations.

BBC’s false news against India is not a new phenomenon. The BBC's 50-year-old flagship weekly current affairs program Panorama had aired a documentary claiming that Bangalore-based suppliers of Primark, a hugely successful retailer with 220 stores across Europe, were using child labor in their production in 2008. This claim has been found to be untrue and the BBC apologized to Primark admitting its mistake.

The British Broadcasting Company, as the BBC was originally called, was formed on 18 October 1922 by a group of leading wireless manufacturers including Marconi. There were no rules, standards or established purpose to guide this organization. Through innovating, experimenting and organising, the service began to expand. Throughout its existence, the BBC has proved itself to be unworthy of any respect as a media company, has worked closely as possible with the British Foreign Office to destabilize other nations, and to create dangerous controversies based on fabricated and false information.

The ongoing controversy created by the BBC documentary to defame the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi; is just another attempt to sabotage political, social and economical relationships between India and the UK, for which the UK will ultimately pay a heavy price.

Here endeth the lesson.