All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >   Fake news, misinformation, false news are te... Start Learning for Free
Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being used interchangeably. This does not overshadow the menace and public hazard that fake news has become over social media. World Economic Forum has rated the spread of false information online as one of the ten biggest global problems in 2013. The consequences of fake news are not one but many. This article, has delved into analyzing electoral laws and psychological concepts behind the fake news. The first concept is “motivated reasoning,” the ideas that we readily believe because they match our views and beliefs. Once a stance is chosen by a person, the brain then constantly keeps filtrating information until he finds one that confirms his beliefs while rejecting the opposing views. This process is known as confirmation bias. Along with individual preference, social media platforms employ algorithms that reinforce these “filter bubbles” by curating information based on previous searches and likes. This one-sidedness of information hampers citizens’ critical thinking, which is essential to the functioning of democracy. No Indian statute or regulatory guideline has defined what is news or has laid down criteria for defining fake news. Any amendment in the existing legal framework should begin with defining this term. Learning from the experience of other countries, any regulation that defines fake news as simply consisting of falsehood may lead to an ambiguous and overbroad definition. This has been witnessed in the case of Malaysia’s Anti-Fake News Act, 2018. However, a bill to repeal this act has been passed. Such a definition would fail in a democratic country like India, where the citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech under the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it will give the government an unfettered power to take down any content that it feels uncomfortable with. Another example is that of law in France that lays down three criteria to evaluate a piece of information as fake news. Firstly, the fake news must be manifest. Secondly, there should be a deliberate attempt towards the dissemination of such news on a large scale. Thirdly, it should lead to a disturbance of the peace or compromise the outcome of an election. While the last two criteria could seem to fit in the Indian regime, the first one brings in ambiguity. In order to bring clarity at the most fundamental level, policymakers must distinguish between harmless propaganda and verifiable misinformation that can cause imminent social harm or damage to the reputation of an individual. This line is not easy to draw as the term fake news in itself is an amorphous category, including misleading and false news. The evaluation may involve mere shoddy journalism from deliberate attempts to spread misinformation. After the policymakers make these necessary distinctions, according to the author, a potential definition that could fit in the Indian scenario could be “Any misinformation or disinformation deliberately disseminated on a large scale that has the potential to threaten the life or national security or an election outcome.”
Q. According to the definition suggested by the author for fake news in India, which of the following will be characterized as ‘fake news’ according to it?
  • a)
    A whatsapp message on a private group of 5 people that a contestant is threatening to kill those who do not vote for him.
  • b)
    An accidental share on Facebook regarding fake election malpractices by a candidate.
  • c)
    A tweet posted by a person with 10M followers urging people to attack the parliament of India.
  • d)
    A picture of an innocent man sent to a friend claiming that he is a thief roaming freely in the neighborhood and should be killed.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Clear all your CLAT doubts with EduRev
Verified Answer
Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being us...
Option A is not on large scale, since only 5 people are on the group. Option B is not deliberate since it was shared accidentally. Option C is right because, it is on a large scale, done deliberately and will threaten the national security of India. Option D is wrong because it is not on a large scale even though it can threaten a man’s life.
View all questions of this test
Most Upvoted Answer
Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being us...
Understanding the Definition of Fake News
The author suggests a definition of fake news in India as “Any misinformation or disinformation deliberately disseminated on a large scale that has the potential to threaten the life or national security or an election outcome.” This definition emphasizes the scale, intent, and potential impact of the information shared.
Analysis of Options
- Option A: A WhatsApp message on a private group of 5 people about a contestant threatening voters.
- This is a private communication and lacks large-scale dissemination. It doesn't meet the threshold of impacting national security or election outcomes.
- Option B: An accidental share on Facebook regarding fake election malpractices by a candidate.
- Although this involves misinformation, the accidental nature of the share indicates no deliberate intent to mislead on a large scale.
- Option C: A tweet posted by a person with 10M followers urging people to attack the parliament of India.
- This option fits the definition perfectly:
- Deliberate Dissemination: The tweet is intentional and public.
- Large Scale: With 10 million followers, it has the potential to reach a vast audience.
- Threat to National Security: Urging an attack on the parliament directly threatens national security, making it critical.
- Option D: A picture of an innocent man sent to a friend claiming he is a thief.
- This scenario involves misinformation but lacks large-scale dissemination and does not pose a direct threat to national security or elections.
Conclusion
Thus, option C is characterized as fake news according to the author’s proposed definition, as it meets all criteria: intent, scale, and potential threat.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being used interchangeably. This does not overshadow the menace and public hazard that fake news has become over social media. World Economic Forum has rated the spread of false information online as one of the ten biggest global problems in 2013. The consequences of fake news are not one but many. This article, has delved into analyzing electoral laws and psychological concepts behind the fake news. The first concept is “motivated reasoning,” the ideas that we readily believe because they match our views and beliefs. Once a stance is chosen by a person, the brain then constantly keeps filtrating information until he finds one that confirms his beliefs while rejecting the opposing views. This process is known as confirmation bias. Along with individual preference, social media platforms employ algorithms that reinforce these “filter bubbles” by curating information based on previous searches and likes. This one-sidedness of information hampers citizens’ critical thinking, which is essential to the functioning of democracy. No Indian statute or regulatory guideline has defined what is news or has laid down criteria for defining fake news. Any amendment in the existing legal framework should begin with defining this term. Learning from the experience of other countries, any regulation that defines fake news as simply consisting of falsehood may lead to an ambiguous and overbroad definition. This has been witnessed in the case of Malaysia’s Anti-Fake News Act, 2018. However, a bill to repeal this act has been passed. Such a definition would fail in a democratic country like India, where the citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech under the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it will give the government an unfettered power to take down any content that it feels uncomfortable with. Another example is that of law in France that lays down three criteria to evaluate a piece of information as fake news. Firstly, the fake news must be manifest. Secondly, there should be a deliberate attempt towards the dissemination of such news on a large scale. Thirdly, it should lead to a disturbance of the peace or compromise the outcome of an election. While the last two criteria could seem to fit in the Indian regime, the first one brings in ambiguity. In order to bring clarity at the most fundamental level, policymakers must distinguish between harmless propaganda and verifiable misinformation that can cause imminent social harm or damage to the reputation of an individual. This line is not easy to draw as the term fake news in itself is an amorphous category, including misleading and false news. The evaluation may involve mere shoddy journalism from deliberate attempts to spread misinformation. After the policymakers make these necessary distinctions, according to the author, a potential definition that could fit in the Indian scenario could be “Any misinformation or disinformation deliberately disseminated on a large scale that has the potential to threaten the life or national security or an election outcome.”Q. Which of the following is not example of confirmation bias?

Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being used interchangeably. This does not overshadow the menace and public hazard that fake news has become over social media. World Economic Forum has rated the spread of false information online as one of the ten biggest global problems in 2013. The consequences of fake news are not one but many. This article, has delved into analyzing electoral laws and psychological concepts behind the fake news. The first concept is “motivated reasoning,” the ideas that we readily believe because they match our views and beliefs. Once a stance is chosen by a person, the brain then constantly keeps filtrating information until he finds one that confirms his beliefs while rejecting the opposing views. This process is known as confirmation bias. Along with individual preference, social media platforms employ algorithms that reinforce these “filter bubbles” by curating information based on previous searches and likes. This one-sidedness of information hampers citizens’ critical thinking, which is essential to the functioning of democracy. No Indian statute or regulatory guideline has defined what is news or has laid down criteria for defining fake news. Any amendment in the existing legal framework should begin with defining this term. Learning from the experience of other countries, any regulation that defines fake news as simply consisting of falsehood may lead to an ambiguous and overbroad definition. This has been witnessed in the case of Malaysia’s Anti-Fake News Act, 2018. However, a bill to repeal this act has been passed. Such a definition would fail in a democratic country like India, where the citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech under the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it will give the government an unfettered power to take down any content that it feels uncomfortable with. Another example is that of law in France that lays down three criteria to evaluate a piece of information as fake news. Firstly, the fake news must be manifest. Secondly, there should be a deliberate attempt towards the dissemination of such news on a large scale. Thirdly, it should lead to a disturbance of the peace or compromise the outcome of an election. While the last two criteria could seem to fit in the Indian regime, the first one brings in ambiguity. In order to bring clarity at the most fundamental level, policymakers must distinguish between harmless propaganda and verifiable misinformation that can cause imminent social harm or damage to the reputation of an individual. This line is not easy to draw as the term fake news in itself is an amorphous category, including misleading and false news. The evaluation may involve mere shoddy journalism from deliberate attempts to spread misinformation. After the policymakers make these necessary distinctions, according to the author, a potential definition that could fit in the Indian scenario could be “Any misinformation or disinformation deliberately disseminated on a large scale that has the potential to threaten the life or national security or an election outcome.”Q. Which of the following is true according to the passage?

Passage:Unlike the US, free speech in India is not absolute. Our Constitution, while guaranteeing the freedom of speech and expression, places “reasonable restrictions” on this basic human right.Journalists are often targeted by state authorities for their comments on social media. In September, last year, a Delhi-based journalist was arrested for his tweets on sculptures at the Sun Temple in Konark, Odisha, and another journalist from Manipur was booked under the stringent National Security Act, 1980, and jailed for uploading a video on the internet in which he made remarks deemed to be “derogatory” towards the Chief Minister of the State.In December, the Union Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, the nodal ministry for regulating matters on information technology and the internet, released a draft amendment to guidelines under the Information Technology Act, which prescribe certain conditions for content hosting platforms to seek protection for third party content.The amendment, which was brought along to tackle the menace of “fake news” and reduce the flow of obscene and illegal content on social media, seeks to mandate the use of “automated filters” for content takedowns on internet platforms and requires them to trace the originator of that information on their services (this traceability requirement is believed to be targeted at messaging apps like WhatsApp, Signal and Telegram).Apart from state authorities, content sharing and social media companies take down content in tandem with their community standards andterms and conditions. This is often arbitrary and inconsistent.We believe that the draft amendment to the rules that regulate platform liability undermines free speech and privacy rights of Indians in the online world, while promoting private censorship by companies.Having said that, acknowledging the problems of circulation of illegal content, legitimate access to law enforcement and disinformation on the internet, the law should mandate governance structures and grievance mechanisms on the part of intermediaries, enabling quick takedown of content determined as illegal by the judiciary or appropriate government agencies.The “filter bubble” effect, where users are shown similar content, results in readers not being exposed to opposing views, due to which they become easy targets of disinformation.Tech-companies must re-think their internal policies to ensure that self-initiated content takedowns are not arbitrary and users have a right to voice their concerns.Government agencies should work with internet platforms to educate users in identifying disinformation to check its spread.Lastly, the government should adhere to constitutionally mandated principles and conduct multi-stakeholder consultations before drafting internet policy to safeguard the varying interests of interested parties.Q.If a social website, say Twitter, uses automated filter to take down personal details, posted by a celebrity, of people who sent her rape threats and obscene pictures, in order to expose them but does not take down the obscene content directed at the celebrity, would such action be in line with the amendment discussed by the author.

Direction: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given below.Several countries have already felt the need to have in place robust responses to disinformation. The European Union (EU) has put out the Code of Practice on Disinformation 2022. Some of the strengthened initiatives of the EU Code include transparency in Political advertising, empowerment of factcheckers and researchers, tools to flag disinformation, and measures to reduce manipulative behaviour. The United Kingdom has proposed enacting an Online Safety Bill which will expect social media platforms (intermediaries) to actively monitor problematic content. Even as the U.K. Bill is being reviewed by a committee in the House of Lords, there are already calls from a number of companies, including WhatsApp and Signal, to scrap the legislation in the interest of privacy. During the progress of the U.K. Bill, the provisions to monitor “legal but harmful” content have already been replaced with greater onus on social media platforms to enforce their terms and conditions in accordance with their policies.A more studied, comprehensive and calculated set of legislative actions is required if there is to be a balance between allowing free speech under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, and protecting citizens from falling prey to malicious disinformation. In the case of Tehseen S. Poonawalla vs Union Of India (2018) the Supreme Court of India had held that it is the duty of the Union and State governments to take steps to curb dissemination of “irresponsible and explosive messages and videos having content which is likely to incite mob violence and lynching of any kind”. Many people can recollect the panic India witnessed in many instances as a result of fake news during the early months of the COVID19 pandemic. The Supreme Court in Alakh Alok Srivastava vs Union Of India (2020) dealt with a Public Interest Litigation on the plight of migrant workers walking thousands of kilometres back home when the country went into its first lockdown. Such instances illustrate the real dangers to public order as a result of the dissemination of fake news.Rather than coming up with a robust framework to tackle the root causes of disinformation, the Union has granted itself greater powers to strike down any content that is found to be unpalatable. With the use of Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, the Union Government has blocked access to any information online that it considers necessary in the interest of the sovereignty and the integrity of India, the security of the state or public order. More recently, the Union brought out the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Cod e) Rules, 2021, or IT Rules, 2021, to regulate content by online publishers of news and social media intermediaries. The recent draft amendments to the IT Rules, 2021, empower the Press Information Bureau, which functions under the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to ‘flag inaccurate and fake news related to government bodies on social media platforms’ amounts to disinformation. It is apparent that the focus has more to do with containing criticism against the Union Government and its leaders than about blocking fake news as such.Q.Which of the following represents a valid rationale for believing that robust responses are necessary to combat disinformation effectively?

Direction: Kindly read the passage carefully and answer the questions given below.Several countries have already felt the need to have in place robust responses to disinformation. The European Union (EU) has put out the Code of Practice on Disinformation 2022. Some of the strengthened initiatives of the EU Code include transparency in Political advertising, empowerment of factcheckers and researchers, tools to flag disinformation, and measures to reduce manipulative behaviour. The United Kingdom has proposed enacting an Online Safety Bill which will expect social media platforms (intermediaries) to actively monitor problematic content. Even as the U.K. Bill is being reviewed by a committee in the House of Lords, there are already calls from a number of companies, including WhatsApp and Signal, to scrap the legislation in the interest of privacy. During the progress of the U.K. Bill, the provisions to monitor “legal but harmful” content have already been replaced with greater onus on social media platforms to enforce their terms and conditions in accordance with their policies.A more studied, comprehensive and calculated set of legislative actions is required if there is to be a balance between allowing free speech under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, and protecting citizens from falling prey to malicious disinformation. In the case of Tehseen S. Poonawalla vs Union Of India (2018) the Supreme Court of India had held that it is the duty of the Union and State governments to take steps to curb dissemination of “irresponsible and explosive messages and videos having content which is likely to incite mob violence and lynching of any kind”. Many people can recollect the panic India witnessed in many instances as a result of fake news during the early months of the COVID19 pandemic. The Supreme Court in Alakh Alok Srivastava vs Union Of India (2020) dealt with a Public Interest Litigation on the plight of migrant workers walking thousands of kilometres back home when the country went into its first lockdown. Such instances illustrate the real dangers to public order as a result of the dissemination of fake news.Rather than coming up with a robust framework to tackle the root causes of disinformation, the Union has granted itself greater powers to strike down any content that is found to be unpalatable. With the use of Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, the Union Government has blocked access to any information online that it considers necessary in the interest of the sovereignty and the integrity of India, the security of the state or public order. More recently, the Union brought out the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Cod e) Rules, 2021, or IT Rules, 2021, to regulate content by online publishers of news and social media intermediaries. The recent draft amendments to the IT Rules, 2021, empower the Press Information Bureau, which functions under the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to ‘flag inaccurate and fake news related to government bodies on social media platforms’ amounts to disinformation. It is apparent that the focus has more to do with containing criticism against the Union Government and its leaders than about blocking fake news as such.Q.What is the underlying reason behind the Unions enhanced authority to oversee online content, as suggested by the passage?

Top Courses for CLATView all

Top Courses for CLAT

Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being used interchangeably. This does not overshadow the menace and public hazard that fake news has become over social media. World Economic Forum has rated the spread of false information online as one of the ten biggest global problems in 2013. The consequences of fake news are not one but many. This article, has delved into analyzing electoral laws and psychological concepts behind the fake news. The first concept is “motivated reasoning,” the ideas that we readily believe because they match our views and beliefs. Once a stance is chosen by a person, the brain then constantly keeps filtrating information until he finds one that confirms his beliefs while rejecting the opposing views. This process is known as confirmation bias. Along with individual preference, social media platforms employ algorithms that reinforce these “filter bubbles” by curating information based on previous searches and likes. This one-sidedness of information hampers citizens’ critical thinking, which is essential to the functioning of democracy. No Indian statute or regulatory guideline has defined what is news or has laid down criteria for defining fake news. Any amendment in the existing legal framework should begin with defining this term. Learning from the experience of other countries, any regulation that defines fake news as simply consisting of falsehood may lead to an ambiguous and overbroad definition. This has been witnessed in the case of Malaysia’s Anti-Fake News Act, 2018. However, a bill to repeal this act has been passed. Such a definition would fail in a democratic country like India, where the citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech under the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it will give the government an unfettered power to take down any content that it feels uncomfortable with. Another example is that of law in France that lays down three criteria to evaluate a piece of information as fake news. Firstly, the fake news must be manifest. Secondly, there should be a deliberate attempt towards the dissemination of such news on a large scale. Thirdly, it should lead to a disturbance of the peace or compromise the outcome of an election. While the last two criteria could seem to fit in the Indian regime, the first one brings in ambiguity. In order to bring clarity at the most fundamental level, policymakers must distinguish between harmless propaganda and verifiable misinformation that can cause imminent social harm or damage to the reputation of an individual. This line is not easy to draw as the term fake news in itself is an amorphous category, including misleading and false news. The evaluation may involve mere shoddy journalism from deliberate attempts to spread misinformation. After the policymakers make these necessary distinctions, according to the author, a potential definition that could fit in the Indian scenario could be “Any misinformation or disinformation deliberately disseminated on a large scale that has the potential to threaten the life or national security or an election outcome.”Q. According to the definition suggested by the author for fake news in India, which of the following will be characterized as ‘fake news’ according to it?a)A whatsapp message on a private group of 5 people that a contestant is threatening to kill those who do not vote for him.b)An accidental share on Facebook regarding fake election malpractices by a candidate.c)A tweet posted by a person with 10M followers urging people to attack the parliament of India.d)A picture of an innocent man sent to a friend claiming that he is a thief roaming freely in the neighborhood and should be killed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being used interchangeably. This does not overshadow the menace and public hazard that fake news has become over social media. World Economic Forum has rated the spread of false information online as one of the ten biggest global problems in 2013. The consequences of fake news are not one but many. This article, has delved into analyzing electoral laws and psychological concepts behind the fake news. The first concept is “motivated reasoning,” the ideas that we readily believe because they match our views and beliefs. Once a stance is chosen by a person, the brain then constantly keeps filtrating information until he finds one that confirms his beliefs while rejecting the opposing views. This process is known as confirmation bias. Along with individual preference, social media platforms employ algorithms that reinforce these “filter bubbles” by curating information based on previous searches and likes. This one-sidedness of information hampers citizens’ critical thinking, which is essential to the functioning of democracy. No Indian statute or regulatory guideline has defined what is news or has laid down criteria for defining fake news. Any amendment in the existing legal framework should begin with defining this term. Learning from the experience of other countries, any regulation that defines fake news as simply consisting of falsehood may lead to an ambiguous and overbroad definition. This has been witnessed in the case of Malaysia’s Anti-Fake News Act, 2018. However, a bill to repeal this act has been passed. Such a definition would fail in a democratic country like India, where the citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech under the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it will give the government an unfettered power to take down any content that it feels uncomfortable with. Another example is that of law in France that lays down three criteria to evaluate a piece of information as fake news. Firstly, the fake news must be manifest. Secondly, there should be a deliberate attempt towards the dissemination of such news on a large scale. Thirdly, it should lead to a disturbance of the peace or compromise the outcome of an election. While the last two criteria could seem to fit in the Indian regime, the first one brings in ambiguity. In order to bring clarity at the most fundamental level, policymakers must distinguish between harmless propaganda and verifiable misinformation that can cause imminent social harm or damage to the reputation of an individual. This line is not easy to draw as the term fake news in itself is an amorphous category, including misleading and false news. The evaluation may involve mere shoddy journalism from deliberate attempts to spread misinformation. After the policymakers make these necessary distinctions, according to the author, a potential definition that could fit in the Indian scenario could be “Any misinformation or disinformation deliberately disseminated on a large scale that has the potential to threaten the life or national security or an election outcome.”Q. According to the definition suggested by the author for fake news in India, which of the following will be characterized as ‘fake news’ according to it?a)A whatsapp message on a private group of 5 people that a contestant is threatening to kill those who do not vote for him.b)An accidental share on Facebook regarding fake election malpractices by a candidate.c)A tweet posted by a person with 10M followers urging people to attack the parliament of India.d)A picture of an innocent man sent to a friend claiming that he is a thief roaming freely in the neighborhood and should be killed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being used interchangeably. This does not overshadow the menace and public hazard that fake news has become over social media. World Economic Forum has rated the spread of false information online as one of the ten biggest global problems in 2013. The consequences of fake news are not one but many. This article, has delved into analyzing electoral laws and psychological concepts behind the fake news. The first concept is “motivated reasoning,” the ideas that we readily believe because they match our views and beliefs. Once a stance is chosen by a person, the brain then constantly keeps filtrating information until he finds one that confirms his beliefs while rejecting the opposing views. This process is known as confirmation bias. Along with individual preference, social media platforms employ algorithms that reinforce these “filter bubbles” by curating information based on previous searches and likes. This one-sidedness of information hampers citizens’ critical thinking, which is essential to the functioning of democracy. No Indian statute or regulatory guideline has defined what is news or has laid down criteria for defining fake news. Any amendment in the existing legal framework should begin with defining this term. Learning from the experience of other countries, any regulation that defines fake news as simply consisting of falsehood may lead to an ambiguous and overbroad definition. This has been witnessed in the case of Malaysia’s Anti-Fake News Act, 2018. However, a bill to repeal this act has been passed. Such a definition would fail in a democratic country like India, where the citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech under the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it will give the government an unfettered power to take down any content that it feels uncomfortable with. Another example is that of law in France that lays down three criteria to evaluate a piece of information as fake news. Firstly, the fake news must be manifest. Secondly, there should be a deliberate attempt towards the dissemination of such news on a large scale. Thirdly, it should lead to a disturbance of the peace or compromise the outcome of an election. While the last two criteria could seem to fit in the Indian regime, the first one brings in ambiguity. In order to bring clarity at the most fundamental level, policymakers must distinguish between harmless propaganda and verifiable misinformation that can cause imminent social harm or damage to the reputation of an individual. This line is not easy to draw as the term fake news in itself is an amorphous category, including misleading and false news. The evaluation may involve mere shoddy journalism from deliberate attempts to spread misinformation. After the policymakers make these necessary distinctions, according to the author, a potential definition that could fit in the Indian scenario could be “Any misinformation or disinformation deliberately disseminated on a large scale that has the potential to threaten the life or national security or an election outcome.”Q. According to the definition suggested by the author for fake news in India, which of the following will be characterized as ‘fake news’ according to it?a)A whatsapp message on a private group of 5 people that a contestant is threatening to kill those who do not vote for him.b)An accidental share on Facebook regarding fake election malpractices by a candidate.c)A tweet posted by a person with 10M followers urging people to attack the parliament of India.d)A picture of an innocent man sent to a friend claiming that he is a thief roaming freely in the neighborhood and should be killed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being used interchangeably. This does not overshadow the menace and public hazard that fake news has become over social media. World Economic Forum has rated the spread of false information online as one of the ten biggest global problems in 2013. The consequences of fake news are not one but many. This article, has delved into analyzing electoral laws and psychological concepts behind the fake news. The first concept is “motivated reasoning,” the ideas that we readily believe because they match our views and beliefs. Once a stance is chosen by a person, the brain then constantly keeps filtrating information until he finds one that confirms his beliefs while rejecting the opposing views. This process is known as confirmation bias. Along with individual preference, social media platforms employ algorithms that reinforce these “filter bubbles” by curating information based on previous searches and likes. This one-sidedness of information hampers citizens’ critical thinking, which is essential to the functioning of democracy. No Indian statute or regulatory guideline has defined what is news or has laid down criteria for defining fake news. Any amendment in the existing legal framework should begin with defining this term. Learning from the experience of other countries, any regulation that defines fake news as simply consisting of falsehood may lead to an ambiguous and overbroad definition. This has been witnessed in the case of Malaysia’s Anti-Fake News Act, 2018. However, a bill to repeal this act has been passed. Such a definition would fail in a democratic country like India, where the citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech under the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it will give the government an unfettered power to take down any content that it feels uncomfortable with. Another example is that of law in France that lays down three criteria to evaluate a piece of information as fake news. Firstly, the fake news must be manifest. Secondly, there should be a deliberate attempt towards the dissemination of such news on a large scale. Thirdly, it should lead to a disturbance of the peace or compromise the outcome of an election. While the last two criteria could seem to fit in the Indian regime, the first one brings in ambiguity. In order to bring clarity at the most fundamental level, policymakers must distinguish between harmless propaganda and verifiable misinformation that can cause imminent social harm or damage to the reputation of an individual. This line is not easy to draw as the term fake news in itself is an amorphous category, including misleading and false news. The evaluation may involve mere shoddy journalism from deliberate attempts to spread misinformation. After the policymakers make these necessary distinctions, according to the author, a potential definition that could fit in the Indian scenario could be “Any misinformation or disinformation deliberately disseminated on a large scale that has the potential to threaten the life or national security or an election outcome.”Q. According to the definition suggested by the author for fake news in India, which of the following will be characterized as ‘fake news’ according to it?a)A whatsapp message on a private group of 5 people that a contestant is threatening to kill those who do not vote for him.b)An accidental share on Facebook regarding fake election malpractices by a candidate.c)A tweet posted by a person with 10M followers urging people to attack the parliament of India.d)A picture of an innocent man sent to a friend claiming that he is a thief roaming freely in the neighborhood and should be killed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being used interchangeably. This does not overshadow the menace and public hazard that fake news has become over social media. World Economic Forum has rated the spread of false information online as one of the ten biggest global problems in 2013. The consequences of fake news are not one but many. This article, has delved into analyzing electoral laws and psychological concepts behind the fake news. The first concept is “motivated reasoning,” the ideas that we readily believe because they match our views and beliefs. Once a stance is chosen by a person, the brain then constantly keeps filtrating information until he finds one that confirms his beliefs while rejecting the opposing views. This process is known as confirmation bias. Along with individual preference, social media platforms employ algorithms that reinforce these “filter bubbles” by curating information based on previous searches and likes. This one-sidedness of information hampers citizens’ critical thinking, which is essential to the functioning of democracy. No Indian statute or regulatory guideline has defined what is news or has laid down criteria for defining fake news. Any amendment in the existing legal framework should begin with defining this term. Learning from the experience of other countries, any regulation that defines fake news as simply consisting of falsehood may lead to an ambiguous and overbroad definition. This has been witnessed in the case of Malaysia’s Anti-Fake News Act, 2018. However, a bill to repeal this act has been passed. Such a definition would fail in a democratic country like India, where the citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech under the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it will give the government an unfettered power to take down any content that it feels uncomfortable with. Another example is that of law in France that lays down three criteria to evaluate a piece of information as fake news. Firstly, the fake news must be manifest. Secondly, there should be a deliberate attempt towards the dissemination of such news on a large scale. Thirdly, it should lead to a disturbance of the peace or compromise the outcome of an election. While the last two criteria could seem to fit in the Indian regime, the first one brings in ambiguity. In order to bring clarity at the most fundamental level, policymakers must distinguish between harmless propaganda and verifiable misinformation that can cause imminent social harm or damage to the reputation of an individual. This line is not easy to draw as the term fake news in itself is an amorphous category, including misleading and false news. The evaluation may involve mere shoddy journalism from deliberate attempts to spread misinformation. After the policymakers make these necessary distinctions, according to the author, a potential definition that could fit in the Indian scenario could be “Any misinformation or disinformation deliberately disseminated on a large scale that has the potential to threaten the life or national security or an election outcome.”Q. According to the definition suggested by the author for fake news in India, which of the following will be characterized as ‘fake news’ according to it?a)A whatsapp message on a private group of 5 people that a contestant is threatening to kill those who do not vote for him.b)An accidental share on Facebook regarding fake election malpractices by a candidate.c)A tweet posted by a person with 10M followers urging people to attack the parliament of India.d)A picture of an innocent man sent to a friend claiming that he is a thief roaming freely in the neighborhood and should be killed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being used interchangeably. This does not overshadow the menace and public hazard that fake news has become over social media. World Economic Forum has rated the spread of false information online as one of the ten biggest global problems in 2013. The consequences of fake news are not one but many. This article, has delved into analyzing electoral laws and psychological concepts behind the fake news. The first concept is “motivated reasoning,” the ideas that we readily believe because they match our views and beliefs. Once a stance is chosen by a person, the brain then constantly keeps filtrating information until he finds one that confirms his beliefs while rejecting the opposing views. This process is known as confirmation bias. Along with individual preference, social media platforms employ algorithms that reinforce these “filter bubbles” by curating information based on previous searches and likes. This one-sidedness of information hampers citizens’ critical thinking, which is essential to the functioning of democracy. No Indian statute or regulatory guideline has defined what is news or has laid down criteria for defining fake news. Any amendment in the existing legal framework should begin with defining this term. Learning from the experience of other countries, any regulation that defines fake news as simply consisting of falsehood may lead to an ambiguous and overbroad definition. This has been witnessed in the case of Malaysia’s Anti-Fake News Act, 2018. However, a bill to repeal this act has been passed. Such a definition would fail in a democratic country like India, where the citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech under the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it will give the government an unfettered power to take down any content that it feels uncomfortable with. Another example is that of law in France that lays down three criteria to evaluate a piece of information as fake news. Firstly, the fake news must be manifest. Secondly, there should be a deliberate attempt towards the dissemination of such news on a large scale. Thirdly, it should lead to a disturbance of the peace or compromise the outcome of an election. While the last two criteria could seem to fit in the Indian regime, the first one brings in ambiguity. In order to bring clarity at the most fundamental level, policymakers must distinguish between harmless propaganda and verifiable misinformation that can cause imminent social harm or damage to the reputation of an individual. This line is not easy to draw as the term fake news in itself is an amorphous category, including misleading and false news. The evaluation may involve mere shoddy journalism from deliberate attempts to spread misinformation. After the policymakers make these necessary distinctions, according to the author, a potential definition that could fit in the Indian scenario could be “Any misinformation or disinformation deliberately disseminated on a large scale that has the potential to threaten the life or national security or an election outcome.”Q. According to the definition suggested by the author for fake news in India, which of the following will be characterized as ‘fake news’ according to it?a)A whatsapp message on a private group of 5 people that a contestant is threatening to kill those who do not vote for him.b)An accidental share on Facebook regarding fake election malpractices by a candidate.c)A tweet posted by a person with 10M followers urging people to attack the parliament of India.d)A picture of an innocent man sent to a friend claiming that he is a thief roaming freely in the neighborhood and should be killed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being used interchangeably. This does not overshadow the menace and public hazard that fake news has become over social media. World Economic Forum has rated the spread of false information online as one of the ten biggest global problems in 2013. The consequences of fake news are not one but many. This article, has delved into analyzing electoral laws and psychological concepts behind the fake news. The first concept is “motivated reasoning,” the ideas that we readily believe because they match our views and beliefs. Once a stance is chosen by a person, the brain then constantly keeps filtrating information until he finds one that confirms his beliefs while rejecting the opposing views. This process is known as confirmation bias. Along with individual preference, social media platforms employ algorithms that reinforce these “filter bubbles” by curating information based on previous searches and likes. This one-sidedness of information hampers citizens’ critical thinking, which is essential to the functioning of democracy. No Indian statute or regulatory guideline has defined what is news or has laid down criteria for defining fake news. Any amendment in the existing legal framework should begin with defining this term. Learning from the experience of other countries, any regulation that defines fake news as simply consisting of falsehood may lead to an ambiguous and overbroad definition. This has been witnessed in the case of Malaysia’s Anti-Fake News Act, 2018. However, a bill to repeal this act has been passed. Such a definition would fail in a democratic country like India, where the citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech under the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it will give the government an unfettered power to take down any content that it feels uncomfortable with. Another example is that of law in France that lays down three criteria to evaluate a piece of information as fake news. Firstly, the fake news must be manifest. Secondly, there should be a deliberate attempt towards the dissemination of such news on a large scale. Thirdly, it should lead to a disturbance of the peace or compromise the outcome of an election. While the last two criteria could seem to fit in the Indian regime, the first one brings in ambiguity. In order to bring clarity at the most fundamental level, policymakers must distinguish between harmless propaganda and verifiable misinformation that can cause imminent social harm or damage to the reputation of an individual. This line is not easy to draw as the term fake news in itself is an amorphous category, including misleading and false news. The evaluation may involve mere shoddy journalism from deliberate attempts to spread misinformation. After the policymakers make these necessary distinctions, according to the author, a potential definition that could fit in the Indian scenario could be “Any misinformation or disinformation deliberately disseminated on a large scale that has the potential to threaten the life or national security or an election outcome.”Q. According to the definition suggested by the author for fake news in India, which of the following will be characterized as ‘fake news’ according to it?a)A whatsapp message on a private group of 5 people that a contestant is threatening to kill those who do not vote for him.b)An accidental share on Facebook regarding fake election malpractices by a candidate.c)A tweet posted by a person with 10M followers urging people to attack the parliament of India.d)A picture of an innocent man sent to a friend claiming that he is a thief roaming freely in the neighborhood and should be killed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being used interchangeably. This does not overshadow the menace and public hazard that fake news has become over social media. World Economic Forum has rated the spread of false information online as one of the ten biggest global problems in 2013. The consequences of fake news are not one but many. This article, has delved into analyzing electoral laws and psychological concepts behind the fake news. The first concept is “motivated reasoning,” the ideas that we readily believe because they match our views and beliefs. Once a stance is chosen by a person, the brain then constantly keeps filtrating information until he finds one that confirms his beliefs while rejecting the opposing views. This process is known as confirmation bias. Along with individual preference, social media platforms employ algorithms that reinforce these “filter bubbles” by curating information based on previous searches and likes. This one-sidedness of information hampers citizens’ critical thinking, which is essential to the functioning of democracy. No Indian statute or regulatory guideline has defined what is news or has laid down criteria for defining fake news. Any amendment in the existing legal framework should begin with defining this term. Learning from the experience of other countries, any regulation that defines fake news as simply consisting of falsehood may lead to an ambiguous and overbroad definition. This has been witnessed in the case of Malaysia’s Anti-Fake News Act, 2018. However, a bill to repeal this act has been passed. Such a definition would fail in a democratic country like India, where the citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech under the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it will give the government an unfettered power to take down any content that it feels uncomfortable with. Another example is that of law in France that lays down three criteria to evaluate a piece of information as fake news. Firstly, the fake news must be manifest. Secondly, there should be a deliberate attempt towards the dissemination of such news on a large scale. Thirdly, it should lead to a disturbance of the peace or compromise the outcome of an election. While the last two criteria could seem to fit in the Indian regime, the first one brings in ambiguity. In order to bring clarity at the most fundamental level, policymakers must distinguish between harmless propaganda and verifiable misinformation that can cause imminent social harm or damage to the reputation of an individual. This line is not easy to draw as the term fake news in itself is an amorphous category, including misleading and false news. The evaluation may involve mere shoddy journalism from deliberate attempts to spread misinformation. After the policymakers make these necessary distinctions, according to the author, a potential definition that could fit in the Indian scenario could be “Any misinformation or disinformation deliberately disseminated on a large scale that has the potential to threaten the life or national security or an election outcome.”Q. According to the definition suggested by the author for fake news in India, which of the following will be characterized as ‘fake news’ according to it?a)A whatsapp message on a private group of 5 people that a contestant is threatening to kill those who do not vote for him.b)An accidental share on Facebook regarding fake election malpractices by a candidate.c)A tweet posted by a person with 10M followers urging people to attack the parliament of India.d)A picture of an innocent man sent to a friend claiming that he is a thief roaming freely in the neighborhood and should be killed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being used interchangeably. This does not overshadow the menace and public hazard that fake news has become over social media. World Economic Forum has rated the spread of false information online as one of the ten biggest global problems in 2013. The consequences of fake news are not one but many. This article, has delved into analyzing electoral laws and psychological concepts behind the fake news. The first concept is “motivated reasoning,” the ideas that we readily believe because they match our views and beliefs. Once a stance is chosen by a person, the brain then constantly keeps filtrating information until he finds one that confirms his beliefs while rejecting the opposing views. This process is known as confirmation bias. Along with individual preference, social media platforms employ algorithms that reinforce these “filter bubbles” by curating information based on previous searches and likes. This one-sidedness of information hampers citizens’ critical thinking, which is essential to the functioning of democracy. No Indian statute or regulatory guideline has defined what is news or has laid down criteria for defining fake news. Any amendment in the existing legal framework should begin with defining this term. Learning from the experience of other countries, any regulation that defines fake news as simply consisting of falsehood may lead to an ambiguous and overbroad definition. This has been witnessed in the case of Malaysia’s Anti-Fake News Act, 2018. However, a bill to repeal this act has been passed. Such a definition would fail in a democratic country like India, where the citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech under the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it will give the government an unfettered power to take down any content that it feels uncomfortable with. Another example is that of law in France that lays down three criteria to evaluate a piece of information as fake news. Firstly, the fake news must be manifest. Secondly, there should be a deliberate attempt towards the dissemination of such news on a large scale. Thirdly, it should lead to a disturbance of the peace or compromise the outcome of an election. While the last two criteria could seem to fit in the Indian regime, the first one brings in ambiguity. In order to bring clarity at the most fundamental level, policymakers must distinguish between harmless propaganda and verifiable misinformation that can cause imminent social harm or damage to the reputation of an individual. This line is not easy to draw as the term fake news in itself is an amorphous category, including misleading and false news. The evaluation may involve mere shoddy journalism from deliberate attempts to spread misinformation. After the policymakers make these necessary distinctions, according to the author, a potential definition that could fit in the Indian scenario could be “Any misinformation or disinformation deliberately disseminated on a large scale that has the potential to threaten the life or national security or an election outcome.”Q. According to the definition suggested by the author for fake news in India, which of the following will be characterized as ‘fake news’ according to it?a)A whatsapp message on a private group of 5 people that a contestant is threatening to kill those who do not vote for him.b)An accidental share on Facebook regarding fake election malpractices by a candidate.c)A tweet posted by a person with 10M followers urging people to attack the parliament of India.d)A picture of an innocent man sent to a friend claiming that he is a thief roaming freely in the neighborhood and should be killed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Fake news, misinformation, false news are terms that are now being used interchangeably. This does not overshadow the menace and public hazard that fake news has become over social media. World Economic Forum has rated the spread of false information online as one of the ten biggest global problems in 2013. The consequences of fake news are not one but many. This article, has delved into analyzing electoral laws and psychological concepts behind the fake news. The first concept is “motivated reasoning,” the ideas that we readily believe because they match our views and beliefs. Once a stance is chosen by a person, the brain then constantly keeps filtrating information until he finds one that confirms his beliefs while rejecting the opposing views. This process is known as confirmation bias. Along with individual preference, social media platforms employ algorithms that reinforce these “filter bubbles” by curating information based on previous searches and likes. This one-sidedness of information hampers citizens’ critical thinking, which is essential to the functioning of democracy. No Indian statute or regulatory guideline has defined what is news or has laid down criteria for defining fake news. Any amendment in the existing legal framework should begin with defining this term. Learning from the experience of other countries, any regulation that defines fake news as simply consisting of falsehood may lead to an ambiguous and overbroad definition. This has been witnessed in the case of Malaysia’s Anti-Fake News Act, 2018. However, a bill to repeal this act has been passed. Such a definition would fail in a democratic country like India, where the citizens are guaranteed freedom of speech under the Indian Constitution. Furthermore, it will give the government an unfettered power to take down any content that it feels uncomfortable with. Another example is that of law in France that lays down three criteria to evaluate a piece of information as fake news. Firstly, the fake news must be manifest. Secondly, there should be a deliberate attempt towards the dissemination of such news on a large scale. Thirdly, it should lead to a disturbance of the peace or compromise the outcome of an election. While the last two criteria could seem to fit in the Indian regime, the first one brings in ambiguity. In order to bring clarity at the most fundamental level, policymakers must distinguish between harmless propaganda and verifiable misinformation that can cause imminent social harm or damage to the reputation of an individual. This line is not easy to draw as the term fake news in itself is an amorphous category, including misleading and false news. The evaluation may involve mere shoddy journalism from deliberate attempts to spread misinformation. After the policymakers make these necessary distinctions, according to the author, a potential definition that could fit in the Indian scenario could be “Any misinformation or disinformation deliberately disseminated on a large scale that has the potential to threaten the life or national security or an election outcome.”Q. According to the definition suggested by the author for fake news in India, which of the following will be characterized as ‘fake news’ according to it?a)A whatsapp message on a private group of 5 people that a contestant is threatening to kill those who do not vote for him.b)An accidental share on Facebook regarding fake election malpractices by a candidate.c)A tweet posted by a person with 10M followers urging people to attack the parliament of India.d)A picture of an innocent man sent to a friend claiming that he is a thief roaming freely in the neighborhood and should be killed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App for FREE
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup