The EU DisinfoLab has revealed its latest investigation into anti-Pakistan/China influence operations and this follows up on two previous investigations published in 2019 and 2020.

What does this investigation do and which is the errant agency?

Essentially expose fake source organisations named as “sources”, non-existent experts and bloggers that are regularly touted by the Indian agency, ANI that plays a heightened role in India’s news eco system especially since 2014.

The investigation that can be read here looks into a number of non-existent organisations, bloggers and journalists who are regularly quoted by Asian News International (ANI). Who is ANI? ANI is an Indian news agency that plays a relevant role in the country’s information ecosystem, providing content for many well-established media across India, such as The Print and Business Standard. ANI’s articles are also reproduced on well-known digital portals such as Yahoo News. With this network, ANI acts as the carrier of news to millions of Indians.

Even before, ANI had previously been accused of reporting the Indian government’s ‘version of truth’ by independent magazine The Caravan. Moreover, two previous EU DisinfoLab investigations have revealed that ANI regularly quoted the defunct ‘EP Today’ and ‘EU Chronicles’, two fake media outlets supposedly specialising in EU affairs that were, in fact, created to push anti-Pakistan/China narratives in India.

EU DisinfoLab’s investigation concludes that:

• ANI has been repeatedly quoting a think tank that was dissolved in 2014 and therefore no longer exists.

• ANI has been using quotes from a journalist, as well as from several bloggers and supposed geopolitical experts, who do not exist.

Fake personae, self-described as James Bond fans, basketball players and management consultants, became geopolitical experts quoted by ANI numerous times on topics such as Pakistan’s army doctrines and China’s ‘wolf warrior diplomacy’.

Interestingly, a think tank, that we had previously linked to the Srivastava group and that was legally dissolved in 2014, is now quoted about twice a week by ANI. The think tank’s website falsely mentions real Canadian university professors as participants in a conference that they never attended, even concocting false quotes by these academics. EU DisinfoLab had already observed this identity-hijacking pattern in our previous Indian Chronicles investigation.

The false narratives pushed by these fake personae and/or organisations are almost entirely about criticising Pakistan and China, countries that are not India’s greatest allies on the international stage. These fake experts or think tanks are quoted almost solely by ANI and then republished across several Indian media outlets. Besides ANI and those outlets republishing its content, barely any other established media covered the reports produced by these ‘Bad Sources’ (BS) – the name we gave to this investigation.

Hence, the assessment that ANI has, at least, failed its readership by not respecting the fundamentals of the Charter of Munich. The fact that some of the ‘organisations’ mentioned use fake personae and are trying to hide their tracks while counting on being regularly quoted by ANI shows that ANI is, de facto, playing a key role in this influence operation.

Forbidden Stories and their media partners have also worked on this investigation.

The Wire  has reported that the latest report centres on the website of a Canadian-based think tank, International Forum for Rights and Security (IFFRAS). ANI quoted IFFRAS more than 200 times between May 2021 and January 2023. “In most instances, it was not only quoting but using IFFRAS ‘reports’ as the backbone of the articles,” the report says.

Though IFFRAS was dissolved in 2014, its website remained online and was being updated. EU DisinfoLab said that the same IP address hosted the IFFRAS website and other websites from the Srivastava group.

The report said that it tried to trace the speakers mentioned in the conference summaries on the website, but most seemed not to exist at all. “Our guess is that the sole purpose of the IFFRAS is to produce content that can be covered by ANI and then republished widely throughout the Indian press,” said the report

 Wondering if IFFRAS was a “single rotten apple”, the EU DisinfoLab researchers then looked into other foreign experts at ‘think tanks’ that are mentioned frequently by ANI. They came across the Policy Research Group (POREG), whose “geopolitical experts” were quoted frequently by ANI on issues like Pakistan’s army doctrines and Chinese foreign policy. 

The report claimed that despite numerous efforts to contact these experts with names like ‘James Duglous Crickton’, ‘Magda Lipan’ – sometimes misspelled as Magad Lipan or Magda Lipin – and ‘Ms Valentin Popescu’, they did not seem to be available.

 “Yet somehow, despite the laughable misspellings and bios, these James Bond fans, basketball players and management consultants have become geopolitical experts, quoted by ANI numerous times,” the report says.

A third organistaion which ANI started quoted reports in 2021 were published by the Center of Political and Foreign Affairs (CPFA), a think tank based in France and registered in Hong Kong which genuinely exists. But, alongside the legitimate reports by the CPFA team, ANI was publishing content that EU DisinfoLab “could not attribute to real individuals”.

Did the DisinfoLab tried to get their version ? Yes! The authors of the report said they again tried to reach out to two “experts” who were ostensibly working at CPFA but “did not receive any response to our requests”.

According to the report, the fake entities and personalities, seemingly based in Europe and North America, were probably propped up as “a way of bringing more credibility and legitimacy to these narratives”, which “almost entirely” were about criticising Pakistan and China.

“Thus, the actors involved seem to prefer using badly constructed fake profiles or fake organisations, even when previously uncovered, rather than relying on real organisations and people,” said the report.

“Worse still, ANI does not seem to be concerned by being the only major agency quoting them as a primary source. In other words, journalists working at ANI must know these sources are fabricated – and if they don’t, they are failing as journalists. In fact, who really cares?” the report asks.

EU DisinforLab also concluded that ANI has “at least, failed its readership by not respecting the fundamentals of the Charter of Munich”. It added, “The fact that some of the ‘organisations’ mentioned use fake personae and are trying to hide their tracks while counting on being regularly quoted by ANI shows that ANI is, de facto, playing a key role in this influence operation.”

The latest EU DisinfoLab report was released in conjunction with the “Story Killers” project to investigate the disinformation-for-hire-industry. Coordinated by French non-profit Forbidden Stories, the project hopes to continue the work of slain Kannada-language journalist Gauri Lankesh.

ANI was set up as Asian Films Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. in 1971, and was renamed ANI in the 1990s. Though questions have been raised about ANI’s independence and the veracity of its reports, it has remained the most popular source of information for Indian media organisations. Reuters held a 49% stake in ANI until December 2022, when it was forced to reduce its shares to comply with revised rules on foreign direct investment in media platforms.

Related:

Stand up for media freedom & ethical journalism: NWMI

Social media platforms finally compel extremist groups to shun hate speech, fake news

The post #BadSources – How Indian news agency ANI quoted sources that do not exist – EU DisinfoLab appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Recently a group of former defence personnel wrote to the President of India urging him to prevent political parties from to stop using the military for political gains. Over 150 veterans signed the letter to President Ramnath Kovind requesting that he “ensure that the secular and a-political character of our Armed Forces is preserved.” They added, “We hereby respectfully urge you to take all necessary steps to urgently direct all political parties that they must forthwith desist from using the military, military uniforms or symbols, and any actions by military formations or personnel, for political purposes or to further their political agendas.” The letter was also copied to the Chief Election Commissioner.

However, soon afterwards, ANI reported that some of the signatories to the letter denied writing it and claimed that their names were added without their knowledge or consent. In their story, ANI quoted Lt Gen (Retd) ML Naidu as saying, “No, my consent has not been taken for any such letter, and neither have I written any such letter.” ANI even tweeted the quote attributing it to Naidu. ANI also claimed that former army chief S.F Rodrigues and former Air Chief Marshal NC Suri had also denied writing to the president or given their endorsement to the letter.

But now according to a report by News Central 24×7, Lt Gen (Retd) Naidu has been misquoted by ANI and a video of the ANI interview does not show him making the statement attributed to him. The Wire also conducted an independent inquiry and discovered that the endorsement of signatories was sought and painstakingly collated.

Now, Major Priyadarshi Chowdhury, SC (Retd) has written to top executives at Thomson Reuters, who have “an investor relationship and strategic partnership over editorial content” with ANI to share the concerns of veterans over ANI’s conduct.

The entire text of the letter is reproduced below:
************************************************************
Dear Mr Adler, Mr Friedenberg, Ms Carpenter, Mr Austin and Mr Ivory-Harte,
 
My name is Maj Priyadarshi Chowdhury, SC (Retd) and I am writing on behalf of a group of retired officers of the Indian armed forces, to share our concern and anger over the recent conduct of Asian News International (ANI), with which Thomson Reuters has both an investor relationship and strategic partnership over editorial content.
The context of this complaint is ANI’s recent reporting on our petition, signed by over 150 military veterans, and addressed to the President of India, to protest the appropriation of the armed forces into political campaigning.

In this context, serious questions arise about ANI’s motives and practices in reporting the alleged denials by some senior officers that they had ever signed the letter.

Two recent stories lays bare the matter:
ANI Tried to Discredit Veterans’ Appeal to President – but Proof Was a Click Away

https://thewire.in/media/ani-veterans-appeal-president-proof
 
https://newscentral24x7.com/lt-general-ml-naidu-ani-letter-to-president-lies/
 
I would be grateful if you read it to the end, including the brief note on ANI’s National Security Editor and his public political stance. We believe that ANI has acted at the behest of India’s ruling party to manipulate quotes and defame our honourable intentions. In our opinion, ANI’s conduct tantamounts to being perfidious with a view to influence the ongoing elections, in India, in a biased manner.

In order for us to plan our further action, could you please inform us as to:
1) How Thomson Reuters evaluates the editorial practices of its strategic partners, to the end of assuring journalistic balance and editorial quality?

2) Whether Thomson Reuters evaluated or examined the practices, political affiliations, and reputation of ANI prior to expanding its strategic partnership in June 2018?

3) Regarding the above, if so, what was Thomson Reuters’ finding about ANI? If not, on what basis does Reuters evaluate the quality and validity of editorial material received from its partners?

4) Whether Thomson Reuters believes that ANI’s motivated misreporting of our genuine and Constitutional appeal meets its own standards for editorial propriety. It is upto Thomson Reuters to evaluate whether such conduct by an investee company meets your mission statement of “….we do business according to the highest standards of ethical and responsible conduct.”
Thomson Reuters commands respect and trust the world over, and in recognition of this, we hope for a reply addressing our concerns.

Yours Sincerely
Maj Priyadarshi Chowdhury, SC (Retd)
**********************************************************************
 

The post Veterans take on ANI after story on their alleged denials about writing to the President appeared first on SabrangIndia.