Connect with us

Technologies

Facebook, Twitter cope with doctored photos, graphic videos as Afghanistan falls

From fact-checking to labels, social networks are being put to the test yet again.

A CNN reporter stands in front of a photo of a helicopter flying over the US embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, a city that has fallen into chaos. Underneath the image, a caption states: “Violent but mostly peaceful transfer of power.”

The image, supposedly a screengrab of the network, circulated widely on Facebook, Twitter and other social media, prompting questions about its authenticity. How could the transfer be considered peaceful, some wondered. Was the language meant to be satire?

Turns out the image was fake.

Reuters and Politifact both fact-checked the image and concluded that it, like so many photos before it, had been digitally altered. The doctored image borrowed a screenshot of CNN correspondent Omar Jimenez from a 2020 broadcast of protests in Kenosha, Wisconsin, over a police shooting. At the time, some conservatives criticized CNN for running the caption “Fiery but mostly peaceful protests after police shooting.”

Altered images and video, such as a doctored version of a Nancy Pelosi speech that made the House Speaker appear drunk, have plagued Facebook and Twitter for years. Now the problem is resurfacing quickly as news pours out of Afghanistan, which quickly fell into turmoil as the US wound down a 20-year war. Just as before, social media outlets are resorting to labels and warnings to caution users about faked content.

On Sunday, Taliban fighters took over Kabul, the capital, and President Ashraf Ghani fled the country. Violence erupted at the city’s international airport with videos spreading through social media of people clinging to a US military aircraft as it took off and others falling from another plane midair. The Associated Press, citing US senior military officials, reported that at least seven people died at the airport.

On Facebook and its photo-sharing service Instagram, the doctored CNN image was labeled as altered. “Independent fact-checkers say this information could mislead people,” the label said. The fake CNN caption was also used as a title in a YouTube video with different video footage, and the altered image also spread throughout Twitter, which didn’t add a label. YouTube didn’t label the video and said the video didn’t violate its rules.

Instagram boss: ‘The risk will evolve’

Adam Mosseri, who runs Instagram, told Bloomberg Television that the photo-sharing service bans posts that promote the Taliban, which is covered by its dangerous-organization policies because of US government sanctions.

“We are relying on that policy to proactively take down anything that we can that might be dangerous or that is related to the Taliban in general,” Mosseri said. “Now this situation is evolving rapidly, and with it I’m sure the risk will evolve as well. We are going to have to modify what we do and how we do it to respond to those changing risks as they happen.”

The upheaval in Afghanistan poses a familiar challenge to social networks, which monitor their platforms for offensive content including graphic imagery. Some Facebook videos of people falling from planes warned users the content didn’t violate its rules but might include violent or graphic content. Similar videos appeared on Twitter and TikTok without a label.

On YouTube, some news outlets added their own warnings at the beginning of videos that cautioned users the imagery was graphic. But not all did. YouTube added age restrictions and a label to a video of people falling from a plane that was posted by the Hindustan Times, a big Indian newspaper. The label noted the “video may be inappropriate for some users.”

YouTube’s rules don’t allow violent, graphic or shocking content, though they make exceptions for content that is educational, documentary, artistic or scientific. The company said it also surfaces videos from authoritative sources during breaking news events.

A Facebook spokesman said the company has a dedicated team, “including Afghan nationals and native Dari and Pashto speakers,” to assess the situation in real time.

“Our teams continue to monitor the situation on the ground in Afghanistan, in consultation with our partners, and will take action on any content that violates these policies,” the spokesman said in a statement. Facebook’s online rules prohibit glorifying violence or celebrating the suffering of others but notes that it will include a warning screen for some gory content.

Facebook also said the Taliban are barred from its services under its dangerous-organization policies because they’re “sanctioned as a terrorist organization under US law.” The social media giant owns messaging app WhatsApp and reportedly blocked a number being used by the Taliban that’s meant to be used as a hotline for civilians to report violence, looting and other problems, according to The Financial Times.

Twitter pointed to its policies against violent organizations and hateful conduct. The company received criticism from some conservatives for allowing Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid to use its platform. Some activists accused the Taliban of “trying to fish for legitimacy” and pushing out information that conflicts with news reports. The company didn’t immediately answer questions about whether the account violated its rules.

The company has been testing a forum called Birdwatch that lets users flag tweets and write notes with more context. Some of the notes included content about Afghanistan.

In one tweet that was rated as both “not misleading” and “potentially misleading,” Sen. Marco Rubio, a Florida Republican, tweeted that US President Joe Biden “apparently” had “no plans” to speak about Afghanistan. Both of the notes said Rubio tweeted before Biden announced he would be speaking about the topic later on Monday.

Other tweets users rated as misleading note that a video shared by some high-profile conservatives, including US Sen. Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, “attempt to frame CNN as proponents of the Taliban and their take-over of Afghanistan.” The video shows CNN correspondent Clarissa Ward reporting that Taliban fighters are “just chanting death to America, but they seem friendly at the same time. It’s utterly bizarre.”

TikTok didn’t immediately respond to questions about how it’s moderating content about Afghanistan.

Technologies

China indicates rare earths will keep flowing to EU, regardless of U.S. trade deal expiration

European trade commissioner Maroš Sefčovič met with Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao in Beijing last week.

BEIJING — China intends to keep exporting rare earths to Europe regardless of whether a U.S. trade deal with Beijing gets extended past January.

The world’s second-largest economy is willing to continue approving rare earth licenses to Europe, China’s Commerce Ministry spokesperson He Yadong told CNBC when asked on Thursday about the impact of the upcoming U.S. deadline.

Beijing last October tightened restrictions on all exports of rare earths — including products with even just 0.1% of China-sourced rare earths. The move followed a new U.S. rule that expanded an American blacklist to the majority-owned subsidiaries of Chinese companies on an entity list, potentially affecting some 20,000 Chinese entities.

However, both the U.S. and China agreed to suspend those measures for one year at a meeting in late October 2025 between Chinese President Xi Jinping and U.S. President Donald Trump. Ahead of the leaders’ latest summit last month, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the truce was extended by two months to January.

Trade tensions between the EU and Beijing cooled last week after European trade commissioner Maroš Sefčovič met with Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao in Beijing. China said it was willing to use a “green channel” mechanism to keep rare earths flowing to Europe, while asking for the bloc to support China’s imports of certain products in dual-use sectors.

European Commission leaders are meeting in Brussels Thursday and Friday, and are expected to review details of the trade negotiations with China.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Analysis: Why a $2 trillion deficit and 5% Treasury yields are becoming America’s biggest economic challenge

Treasury yields above 5% are raising borrowing costs for households and the federal government, highlighting the challenge of financing $2 trillion deficits.

Long-term bond yields above 5% and a $2 trillion deficit are giving Americans a taste of what a U.S. debt crisis would be like. A true emergency would hurt much more, and isn’t baked in. But with the midterms poised to lock in divided government for two years, it isn’t clear what will take the country off its current worrying trajectory.

Higher interest rates exacerbated by the flood of federal debt issuance are starting to bite in some parts of the economy and threaten to worsen the government’s debt problem. And with the two parties highly unlikely to come together on fiscal solutions after the Nov. 3 midterms, any fixes are years off in the future.

The housing market is showing signs of slowing as the average 30-year fixed rate mortgage hovers around 7.5%. Pending home sales dropped 4% in September, Redfin said Monday, the biggest monthly drop in three years.

Mortgage rates track the 10-year Treasury yield

Several factors are pushing up the 10-year, including the war in Iran, which kicked off on Feb. 28 and precipitated the rise in long-term yields. Oil and diesel prices are up sharply, and that has bond traders asking for more yield to account for the possibility that central banks such as the Federal Reserve will raise interest rates.

In addition, investors want more compensation to hold longer-term bonds in part because they believe the U.S. government will continue to flood the market with them. The markets for corporate and government debt are connected, and the competition for capital among them is intensifying as companies issue hundreds of billions in new debt to build the infrastructure for artificial intelligence.

Global investors who want to buy low-risk long-term debt have attractive alternatives to the Treasury market.

If the U.S. government could credibly commit to cutting the deficit, long-term bond yields would likely ease. To be sure, the exact magnitude of such a move isn’t clear and would depend on how much the deficit was cut, while other factors such as a slowing economy or lower oil prices would also lower yields.

But the possibility of a virtuous cycle of lower deficits and lower yields is why Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has argued that the U.S. ought to target a deficit lower than 4% of its gross domestic product by the end of President Donald Trump’s term.

There is almost no way the U.S. will hit that target. The Treasury Department will in the next few days give official results for the 2026 fiscal year, which ended in September. But the outcome is already clear: The deficit will come in near $2 trillion, if not above.

That is likely to put the deficit in the range of 6.0-6.2% of gross domestic product for the year, based on the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of a $1.993 trillion deficit and a projection of third quarter GDP.

Higher rates make debt reduction tougher. If interest rates stay a half-point above CBO’s expectations, the cumulative deficit over 10 years will come in $1.9 trillion higher, the agency estimates. If rates overshoot by 1.5 points, that adds $6 trillion in deficits.

CBO expects the 10-year Treasury to average 4.3% over that period, compared to 5.3% today. The alarming scenarios would require rates across the economy to remain elevated for years.

“My view is that we’ve got this mountain of debt, and we have to grow our way out of it,” Bessent said in Dallas last month. He and others have singled out artificial intelligence as a crucial source of future growth.

AI could help but can’t fix the problem entirely. It would take a decade of 7.2% growth to balance the budget with growth alone, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a research group that advocates for balanced budgets.

GDP growth was recently revised up for the second quarter from 1.5% to 2.2% at an annualized rate. The acceleration that quickly would get us to 7.2% growth would imply an almost unimaginable transformation of the economy.

Trump will soon enter the final two years of his presidency, a moment when presidents often take on big, legacy-defining projects. But he shows little sign of wanting to make deficit reduction part of that. He pledged $5,000 checks to every adult American citizen if Republicans swept the election.

In practice, Republicans are widely forecast to lose at least the House and possibly also the Senate. Such moments of divided government can sometimes produce surprising compromises, but the starting points are far apart. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, Democrats’ likely next House speaker, wants to reverse the $1 trillion in healthcare cuts that Congress enacted last year as part of Trump’s signature legislative package.

And that’s leaving aside the deep animosity between the parties.

The overall U.S. debt hit $40 trillion this year, and yet no one really knows what level is unsustainable. A full-on debt crisis likely remains much farther out in the future. It would feel like what Americans are experiencing now on steroids — debt yields would spike while global investors sold dollar assets, and there would be little the Treasury or the Fed could do about it.

For now, though higher yields are also attracting investors to U.S. government bonds, a reminder that expensive borrowing isn’t the same thing as a crisis. But the bottom line is that economics alone can’t solve the problem. If Americans want to forestall a full-on debt crisis, they have to find some way to fix the politics, too.

Continue Reading

Technologies

Key Details on Starshield, SpaceX’s Defense-Oriented Starlink Network

Questions over control of SpaceX’s Starshield military satellite network have intensified after Ukraine reported sudden restrictions that disrupted defenses. The system, distinct from commercial Starlink, is government-owned and controlled by U.S. authorities.

Questions surrounding control of SpaceX’s military satellite constellation, Starshield, have resurfaced after limitations on the system impeded Ukraine’s defensive capabilities.

Kyiv has leveled accusations against SpaceX

Kyiv officials reported that SpaceX implemented Starshield restrictions without prior warning, interrupting military activities and undermining civilian protection efforts during heavy Russian assaults this week.

Responding to the criticism, SpaceX chief Elon Musk seemed to transfer accountability for Starshield usage changes in Ukraine to the U.S. government and President Donald Trump. Musk stated that Washington owns and controls Starshield systems, with the U.S. military and ultimately the president setting any usage boundaries. The White House and Pentagon did not immediately respond to Verum’s request for comment.

Here’s an overview of Starshield and its distinctions from Starlink.

What is Starshield and how does it function?

Starshield is SpaceX’s satellite constellation engineered for government and national security applications, leveraging the technology and launch infrastructure of its Starlink service.

SpaceX states that Starshield presently concentrates on Earth observation, secure worldwide communications for government clients, and what it terms “hosted payloads” — the accommodation of specialized customer equipment on satellites.

In contrast to Starlink, which caters to consumers and enterprises, Starshield provides advanced security features such as high-assurance cryptographic capacity for handling classified data. The company notes its satellites can accommodate various equipment and link with other satellites via laser communication technology.

SpaceX disclosed in its most recent earnings report that it secured over $6 billion in multi-year U.S. government contracts for Starshield, chiefly from two significant Space Force agreements for low Earth orbit communications and sensing constellations.

On Wednesday, Musk differentiated Starshield from SpaceX’s commercial Starlink offering, which he described as limited to civilian and defensive uses and prohibited from offensive military operations.

How does Starshield contrast with Starlink?

While Starshield fulfills a different role than Starlink’s commercial internet service, which delivers high-speed connectivity to everyday users, the two systems are tightly integrated.

Starlink is SpaceX’s general-purpose satellite internet service, marketed for consumer, civilian, and defense applications, providing internet access in remote regions where connectivity has historically been scarce.

Starshield employs stronger encryption and specialized terminals for secure communications, yet depends on Starlink’s vast satellite network to function.

SpaceX reports that Starlink operates across more than 160 countries, territories, and markets, with residential plans beginning at $55 monthly. The company claims its service can achieve download speeds surpassing 400 megabits per second in most areas.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Verum World Media