RS MP Priyanka Chaturvedi flags ‘gross misuse’ of AI on social media, writes to IT Minister Vaishnaw

The rapid evolution of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has ushered in an era of unprecedented technological advancement, but also presents complex challenges, particularly in the realm of social media. The incident flagged by Rajya Sabha MP Priyanka Chaturvedi regarding the 'gross misuse' of AI tools like Grok on X (formerly Twitter) to create and disseminate objectionable images of women using fake accounts underscores a critical intersection of technology, ethics, gender justice, and digital governance in India.

**Background Context:** The digital landscape has been profoundly transformed by the advent of generative AI, which can create realistic text, images, audio, and video from simple prompts. While these tools hold immense potential for innovation and creativity, their dual-use nature means they can also be weaponized for malicious purposes. Social media platforms, designed for connectivity and information sharing, inadvertently become conduits for such misuse, especially when coupled with anonymity provided by fake accounts. India, with its massive internet user base (over 800 million), is particularly vulnerable to the societal impacts of unchecked AI misuse, ranging from misinformation to cyberbullying and gender-based online violence.

**What Happened:** MP Priyanka Chaturvedi addressed a letter to Union IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw, drawing attention to a specific and alarming trend: the use of AI tools, particularly Grok (an AI chatbot integrated into X), to generate and post objectionable images of women. The critical aspect highlighted is the deployment of fake accounts to perpetuate this content, adding a layer of anonymity and making identification and prosecution more challenging. This isn't merely about offensive content; it's about the deliberate creation and propagation of harmful, often non-consensual, synthetic media targeting women, which constitutes a severe violation of privacy and dignity.

**Key Stakeholders Involved:** Several entities bear responsibility and are impacted. The **Government of India**, primarily through the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), is the chief regulator, tasked with framing policies and ensuring compliance. **Social Media Platforms** like X, and the developers of AI tools like Grok, are crucial intermediaries; they have a responsibility to design safe platforms, moderate content, implement robust grievance redressal mechanisms, and comply with national laws. The **victims**, predominantly women, suffer direct harm, including reputational damage, psychological distress, and potential real-world threats. **Civil Society Organizations** and **Members of Parliament** like Ms. Chaturvedi act as watchdogs, advocating for user rights and highlighting systemic issues. Finally, **AI Developers** themselves have an ethical obligation to incorporate safeguards and 'safety by design' principles into their products.

**Why This Matters for India:** This incident carries profound significance for India across multiple dimensions. From a **digital governance** perspective, it exposes the urgent need for a robust and comprehensive regulatory framework for AI, building upon existing laws. For **women's safety and rights**, it represents a direct assault on online dignity, privacy (Article 21 of the Constitution), and equality (Articles 14 and 15). The proliferation of such content can create a hostile online environment, deterring women from participating in digital spaces and exacerbating gender inequality. From a **social standpoint**, it erodes trust in digital platforms and poses a threat to public discourse by normalising harmful content. Economically, a less secure digital environment can hinder India's ambitious 'Digital India' initiatives and broader economic growth reliant on a trusted digital ecosystem.

**Historical Context and Related Legislation:** India has grappled with cybercrime and online content moderation for decades. The **Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act)**, with amendments, provides the primary legal framework for cyber activities. Sections like 67, 67A, and 67B deal with publishing or transmitting obscene or sexually explicit material, while Section 66E addresses violation of privacy. However, these predate advanced generative AI. The **Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021** (IT Rules, 2021) placed greater due diligence obligations on intermediaries, including the removal of unlawful content within specified timelines and establishing grievance redressal mechanisms. Most recently, the **Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023**, while primarily focusing on data privacy, reinforces the right to privacy and the need for responsible handling of personal data, which can be extended to the misuse of personal attributes through AI. The fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression (Article 19(1)(a)) is subject to reasonable restrictions (Article 19(2)), which includes public order, decency, or morality, providing constitutional backing for regulating such harmful content.

**Future Implications:** This incident will likely accelerate discussions on a dedicated **AI regulatory framework** in India, potentially drawing inspiration from global efforts like the EU AI Act. Future policies will need to address AI accountability, transparency, data governance, and ethical deployment. There will be increased pressure on social media companies to invest in advanced AI detection tools, strengthen content moderation, and enhance user verification processes to combat fake accounts. Furthermore, fostering **digital literacy** among citizens to identify and report AI-generated misinformation and harmful content will be crucial. Internationally, the cross-border nature of digital platforms necessitates global cooperation to establish common standards and enforcement mechanisms to tackle AI misuse effectively.