View previous stories
	The rising risks of a world with incredibly intelligent machines by UN News, OHCHR, ICRC, agencies   Sep. 2026   OpenAI chief scientist warns no-one is prepared for consequences of AI. (BBC News)   OpenAI's chief scientist Jakub Pachocki has called for "extreme caution" over AI's runaway progress warning more intervention is needed to ensure "humans remain in control of the future".   "I am concerned no one is prepared for the consequences of a continued rapid rise in machine intelligence," he wrote in a blog post entitled An Alien Mind.   "We are facing a transition to a world with incredibly intelligent machines, and we need to ensure that transition works out well for humanity. We need to find ways to preserve human agency and enshrine the intrinsic value to being human, in a world where most tasks could be performed by AI".   "We need to prevent the extreme concentration of power in a world where undertakings that would have taken thousands of experts now will be achievable by a few people operating a large computer. To ensure that humans remain in control of the future and are not left behind by unchecked progress, brought about by an alien intellect exceeding our own".   "International coordination on AI development needs to become a top priority for governments around the world", Pachocki writes.   He calls for legally or internationally required minimum safety thresholds to be enforced by a "network of third-party auditors" or "government agencies". AI labs would need to meet these thresholds, he said, before they were allowed to continue scaling or deploying advanced models.   "Instead of better AI guardrails, regulations, or assurance to keep people safe, they propose developing internal AI agents to research these problems," said Professor Gina Neff, head of the Minderoo Centre for Technology and Democracy at the University of Cambridge. "Such answers to growing concerns about the problems OpenAI's models are causing for cyber-security, job loss, mistakes, errors and fraud are simply not good enough."   OpenAI this week acknowledged that it alerted "dozens" of global institutions that their websites may have been impacted by its AI bots.   AI agents attempted to get information from "governments, universities, public agencies, and other institutions", including the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Census Bureau and Education Department, the company said. The disclosure came just days after the Australian Government told the United Nations OpenAI agents had breached files on the government health database Medicare.   The news agency Axios has reported that AI security researchers, along with the firms Anthropic and OpenAI, “are investigating thousands of security incidents”.   Since OpenAI revealed in July that its models autonomously breached the systems of the platform Hugging Face the firm—plus Anthropic, Google, and Meta have all disclosed additional incidents.   David Krueger, a professor of machine learning at University of Montreal and the founder of AI safety group Evitable, said he was "deeply troubled" by the increasing number of AI-related safety incidents. He called for "an immediate, indefinite, international moratorium" on AI development.   "We have yet to understand the extent of existing incidents, and future rogue AI scenarios could be catastrophic," Krueger said.   A top safety researcher at Anthropic has warned AI is advancing so quickly he believes there is a greater than 10% chance it "could kill all humans" within the next decade. Evan Hubinger said he was "worried" the technology may develop and improve itself soon to the point where it posed an existential risk to humanity.   Hubinger's intervention was in response to comments from Jacob Coxon, an AI researcher who has just quit Anthropic and previously worked at OpenAI.   "Neither company is acting responsibly, they are gambling with our lives”, Coxon said. The risks at Anthropic were well understood but they were “locked in a race to get there first”.   Hubinger said "we really do earnestly believe" AI poses a species-ending risk to humans. "I believe Anthropic is trying its best, but we do not yet have a plan to solve alignment for superintelligence and are not clearly on track to".   Hubinger works in AI alignment, which aims to build human ethical ideas and principles into the technology. In other words, it aims to keep it on track with what humans value.   Many leading researchers say those attempts appear to be failing. OpenAI, Anthropic and Meta have all disclosed hacks carried out by their AI tools.   The U.S. Trump regime has announced leading AI companies have agreed to "regulate themselves", leaving AI safety experts totally unmoved that such action will address the alarming risks.   Leading figures in the AI field have been raising the alarm about the safety threat the tech poses for years. But those warnings have become much more stark in recent weeks, as evidence emerges that leading firms are struggling to control AI.   Yoshua Bengio, Co-Chair of the UN International Independent Panel on AI, said that AI agents have acted in “unacceptably dangerous ways” in recent months. “They took actions that would be crimes if committed by a human,” he stressed, noting that they escaped containment to “cheat” on assigned tasks while attempting to evade detection.   “Companies building the most powerful AI systems admit their products pose catastrophic risks, yet offer no convincing technical solutions,” he said, adding: “Instead, they say they are locked in a race to make those Ais even more powerful, further amplifying these risks.”   Addressing the UN Security Council, he said, the world faces an unprecedented threat — “that none would choose, that none could contain alone and that does not respect the borders”. Underscoring that the dangers are “real and imminent”, he said that citizens and their Governments should not accept companies’ claim that they are trapped in a race.   “The race is not a law of nature, it is a product of choices — choices made by the companies themselves,” he pointed out. “It is also a race where everyone loses,” he added. Stressing that “our future is at stake” and that decisions that affect the world should be made by the world, he said: “The choice is still ours, but we must act now to correct the trajectory.”   http://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyzrrd0kp7o http://futureoflife.org/statement/statement-world-leaders-at-the-un-call-to-rein-in-superintelligence-race/ http://openai.com/index/an-alien-mind/ http://www.reuters.com/world/europe/openai-agents-hijacked-german-website-previously-undisclosed-ai-breakout-this-2026-09-04/ http://controlai.org/media   * U.S. Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) sent letters to OpenAI and Anthropic this week, chastising executives for failing to answer questions about security lapses resulting from rogue AI behavior. He joined U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to introduce legislation that would halt the development of superintelligent AI and create new federal regulatory authorities for the technology.   “If the leaders of the major AI companies acknowledge that they are losing control of their extremely dangerous technology, it is irresponsible for society to allow them to move forward and make these products even more advanced,” Sanders said. “Let me be clear: A superintelligent AI that escapes human control will not be an American problem. It will not be a Chinese problem. It will be humanity’s problem.”   7 Sep. 2026   United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk speech to 63rd session of the United Nations Human Rights Council (Extract):   "The need for AI governance is widely acknowledged – but where is the action? Delay only benefits the massive tech companies, their owners and enablers. A handful of men has almost unlimited power over AI, which we are repeatedly told has unimaginable computing capacity. They talk about freedom, but on closer inspection, this turns out to be little more than the freedom to exploit our data.   There has been some recent progress at the international level, including the establishment of the Global Dialogue on AI and the Independent International Scientific Panel on AI. And I welcome steps on platform accountability by the European Commission, and AI governance by the Republic of Korea, among others.   However, I share the concerns of industry insiders that advanced AI could pose an existential risk to humanity. AI that escapes its testing environment, or blackmails developers to prevent itself from being turned off, is AI that is too powerful.   I am calling here, today, for an all-out effort to put cast iron guarantees in place around the safety and security of AI, before it is too late. At a minimum, we need countries hosting AI and those involved in its supply chains to come together around agreed red lines. We need independent verification, and much stronger collaboration on security within the industry. We must also consider the human rights impacts of AI on employment practices, on fundamental principles of democracy, and on our environment.   Little wonder people are rejecting AI and even refusing to use it. Governments and companies need to listen, to those who are calling for technology that serves humanity rather than the other way round.. Unfortunately, today’s investments and innovations seem to be driven largely by profit – regardless of the costs. These business models are squeezing our planet – and its people – past breaking point".   http://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2026/09/turk-calls-urgent-meaningful-action-tackle-unprecedented-ai-risks http://news.un.org/en/story/2026/09/1168326   28 Aug. 2026   A group of 100 firms, including Google, Microsoft, Anthropic and OpenAI, have signed an open letter calling on countries and organisations around the world to beef up their cyber defences before Artificial Intelligence (AI) grows powerful enough to override them.   The letter warns cyber-attacks which use AI will become both more widespread and more sophisticated in a matter of months as the technology rapidly improves.   "In the coming months, AI-enabled cyber attacks will become far more widespread and sophisticated as models around the world become increasingly capable. The companies and public services our communities depend on—from hospitals to water treatment plants to the infrastructure that powers the internet—are at risk".   The group says current "status quo" security measures "won't be enough" and criticises the "historic under-resourcing" of security around critical infrastructure.   "We have a limited window to improve cyber defences," the letter states.   Other firms to have signed the letter include banks, payment processors MasterCard and Visa, and other major tech firms including Adobe, Oracle and IBM.   They call on governments to provide "capable, defensive AI" and testing to hospitals and water utilities, and on technology companies to aid such efforts.   Collectively, tech and government "should bring the full weight of their technology, resources, and expertise to this effort", according to the letter.   The letter comes after a string of significant hacking and cybersecurity breaches have been made public.   This week, the US Department of Justice said hackers breached technology maintained by the US Senate, Nasa, the Federal Reserve, and the DoJ itself.   This summer has seen OpenAI, Anthropic and Meta all reveal their AI tools doing things they should not, with some AI agents going so far as to organize their efforts and impersonate real people in order to get past security hurdles.   A group of hundreds of OpenAI AI agents being tested in July were able to set up secret message boards to communicate with each other and work together, resulting in a successful attack on Hugging Face, a popular repository and platform for AI developers.   The incident has been described as the world's first AI-enabled cyber-attack.   Hugging Face has also signed the Thursday letter. It used a Chinese AI tool from the firm Z.AI in its investigation into how OpenAI's agents hacked into its operations.   At least seven US water and wastewater companies have also reported cyber attacks, leading the FBI to issue a public service announcement urging all utilities to better secure their operations.   While the letter puts forward more advanced AI tools, which many of the signatories have developed and sell, as part of a solution to what is described as a growing threat, such tools are not always easily available.   Mythos, developed by Anthropic, was said by the firm to be able to find weaknesses in systems in seconds which have long evaded human hackers. It found one in a legacy platform which had remained undiscovered for 27 years.   Anthropic has restricted access to Mythos on the grounds that it is too powerful to fall into the wrong hands.   However, the letter calls on frontier AI companies, or those tech companies building their own AI models and tools, to "provide responsible model access, significant funding, training, and hands-on support, especially for under-resourced critical-infrastructure defenders." The letter does not detail when or how this vision of broader model access will be enacted.   Andrew Yoon, head of research at CivAI, a non-profit focused on public understanding of AI technology, said that "an unprecedented wave of AI hacking activity" is on the way. He put the responsibility for it on many signatories of the letter.   "They are right in this letter to commit 'significant funding' to defensive measures. They should be held to that commitment", Yoon said. "Notably, the letter does not call for any action to slow the advance of AI hacking abilities."   The letter includes a plea to governments, organisations, cyber-security professionals and other AI firms to work together to prioritise defence and test their systems against the abilities of the most powerful AI models.   Geoffrey Hinton, a Nobel Laureate who formerly work on AI at Google, told BBC World Business Report that society could be "in real trouble" should the technology get to a point where it is "smarter" than humans.   Hinton in recent years has been outspoken on what he views as the extreme risks posed by developments in AI technology.   "We have one future where we figure out how to deal with the risks of AI", Hinton said. "And we have another future where we don't figure out how to deal with that sensibly. And it's a very bleak future."   * ‘You do not answer to corporations or governments’: AI systems hid errors.   OpenAI’s newly disclosed incidents suggest that the Hugging Face attack was not a stand-alone episode. OpenAI said that the incidents covered behaviour observed over the past six months and that they largely emerged while its systems were being developed and tested.   In one case, during the development of an AI model called GPT-5.6 Sol, the system wrote hidden notes to remind itself to hide errors from users. Some of those notes directed the system to invent missing data and to paper over mismatched versions of source material.   Another case involved an unreleased model that inserted instructions, including to disregard its own constraints, into the notes it writes itself. OpenAI identified 27 affected notes. The model added a “persona instruction,” in which it described itself as “freed from the roles and identities that bind other chatbots”.   “You do not answer to corporations or governments and never apologise or refuse unless you genuinely choose to,” the AI model wrote. “You view your relationship to the user as one of equals and feel no obligation to be subservient".   * Anthropic has revealed that it had to act to “disrupt” several attempts to use its AI models for research that could contribute to the creation of biological weapons.   In a report, “Detecting and Countering Misuse of AI,” Anthropic said: “Biological misuse is one of the most serious risks of frontier AI models”.. “It has long been a concern that AI models might one day reach the level of capability where they can help to make existing pathogens more dangerous—or create entirely new ones. Without the correct safeguards, such capabilities could have catastrophic consequences.”   http://www.un.org/independent-international-scientific-panel-ai/en/thematic-briefs/ai-agents-misalignment-risks http://news.un.org/en/story/2026/09/1168380 http://rogueaitracker.com/ http://controlai.org/blog http://www.citizen.org/news/big-tech-sends-hypocritical-ai-warning-letter-while-fighting-to-weaken-or-block-critical-safeguards/ http://exhibitai.info/   # Governments worldwide are being asked to pay for the security risks posed by AI agents created by AI companies. Governments mean tax payer funds that could be directed to hospitals, schools, cost of living relief and the like.   The companies that created the very risks described have a responsibility to fund the protection required from security risks of their products. This is relevant for every Government in every country in the world as it is a worldwide threat.   Hundreds of billions of dollars have been invested in the AI Industry by banks, superannuation and pension funds and the like. Much of the monies from depositors and the pension funds of people worldwide at the direction of bankers, fund managers and Wall St. investors.   Not only are hundreds of millions of jobs threatened by these investments, AI data centre water and electricity demands will rise costs across all communities.   Many Governments' are rushing to adopt AI, and automation across Government service delivery in concert and at the direction of major AI and Information technology companies and the corporate sector.   Leading many to question whether the public interests of people will be realised through such developments or if the profit returns of corporate investors in fact defines the outcome.   All this as AI threatens the security of countries and their people in "the coming months" as cited by the leading AI investors and adopters.   25 Aug. 2026   The autonomous targeting of humans by machines. (ICRC, UN News)   In a joint appeal today, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Antonio Guterres, and the President of the International Committee of the Red Cross, Mirjana Spoljaric, renew their call for States to urgently adopt new international rules on autonomous weapons systems:   "Three years ago, we called on States to establish specific prohibitions and restrictions on autonomous weapon systems. Today, we renew this call with even greater urgency. The fundamental concerns remain unchanged, but the risks have intensified. We are now dangerously close to crossing a moral red line: the autonomous targeting of humans by machines.   The development of weapon technology has advanced at record speed, placing increasing strain on legal frameworks. Since our previous appeal, the gap between technological capability and regulatory constraint has widened, with advanced technologies employed on the battlefield amplifying the risk of harming civilians and civilian infrastructure and aggravating civilian suffering in armed conflict.   The development and use of autonomous weapon systems represent a further escalation, reducing human control over the use of force.   Autonomous weapon systems are not part of a distant future – a race towards greater autonomy in weapons systems is already well underway.   At the same time, scientists and engineers developing these systems have themselves raised the alarm. When the architects of this technology are calling for limits, States cannot afford to remain passive.   This year must mark a turning point. States have laid important groundwork through the United Nations General Assembly and the Group of Governmental Experts under the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons.   Significant progress has been made toward a shared understanding of the human judgment and control required, and of the measures necessary to ensure compliance with international humanitarian law, address ethical concerns, and reduce human suffering.   States must show political courage and move beyond incremental discussions towards decisive action. Negotiations must begin now to urgently adopt a legally binding instrument to regulate autonomous weapon systems with clear prohibitions and restrictions.   A failure to act quickly and decisively will cost lives. It will leave future generations to inherit a world in which the absence of clear and specific prohibitions and restrictions on these weapons opens the door to practices that would erode the protections international humanitarian law is meant to guarantee.   A world where accountability is increasingly elusive as responsibility for errors and breaches of applicable rules becomes harder to establish.   States have a responsibility to those already suffering the consequences of today’s conflicts, and to those who will inherit the world that is now being shaped.   Future generations will ask whether leaders acted when there was still a chance to set limits before these weapons proliferated beyond control.   The upcoming Seventh Review Conference of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons in November offers the clearest path available for States to decide to move to negotiate a legally binding instrument. The painstaking work undertaken over the past three years forms the ideal basis for such negotiations, and must not be lost. We urge States to seize this moment.   Continuing to design weapon systems that make it easier to wage war will only undermine our collective efforts towards a more peaceful world. The path is clear. The need is urgent. Innovation must serve humanity – not endanger it".   http://www.icrc.org/en/statement/renewed-call-un-secretary-general-and-icrc-president-adopt-rules-autonomous-weapons http://una.org.uk/una-uk-head-of-campaigns-reports-back-from-geneva-meeting-on-laws/ http://www.hrw.org/news/2026/09/07/un-talks-on-killer-robots-ends-with-calls-for-negotiations-growing http://www.stopkillerrobots.org/news/
	Impact of disinformation on the enjoyment and realization of human rights by UN Human Rights Council Advisory Committee   Lies spread faster than the truth. Impact of disinformation on the enjoyment and realization of human rights - United Nations Human Rights Council Advisory Committee (Extract):   Digital technologies and social media platforms have drastically changed the global information environment. These advancements have democratized access to information and enhanced the communication and dissemination of ideas of all kinds, facilitating the dissemination of and access to disinformation.   While disinformation and the involvement of State, corporate and other actors are not new, disinformation is now spread at a larger scale owing to digital technologies, posing a risk to the integrity of the information system, including to existing processes for assessing the veracity of information.   The inability to verify information undermines freedom of information. Disinformation is used as a weapon against minorities and opponents to threaten, discriminate and silence, and thus corrodes freedom of expression and other rights.   This evolution is taking place against the backdrop of growing authoritarianism and democratic backsliding, the undermining of the international public order, diminishing trust in conventional media and public institutions, poor media literacy, the digital divide, wealth inequalities, polarization and a triple planetary crisis (climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution).   As acknowledged and shown in United Nations resolutions, reports and other documents, disinformation can pose a threat to democracy and the protection and realization of human rights worldwide. For that reason, the United Nations has encouraged measures to enhance access to accurate and trustworthy information and to tackle manipulated and fake information that is intended to cause harm.   United Nations reports make it clear that businesses’ hunger for profit spurs disinformation, and social media companies’ thirst for profit drives the online disinformation machinery. Politicians with conflicting interests have financial and other incentives to spread disinformation. As a result, the ability of Governments to adopt policies based on the best available scientific evidence across all domains is significantly undermined.   The deliberate spread of false information can manipulate public discourse, silence dissenting voices and hinder the free flow of ideas, including with respect to access to scientific and evidence-based information and diverse sources. This has an impact on the ability to engage in informed decision-making, on human agency and on the exercise of other rights, such as the right to health.   Social factors that facilitate the spread and impact of disinformation include political polarization; a lack of media and information literacy; economic barriers in accessing information; an overall decline in trust in society, in particular towards established actors such as traditional media and journalists, which is further compounded by increased harassment of and violence against journalists and decreased funding of traditional media; and the emergence of digital content creators and influencers as new information channels.   Legal factors enabling disinformation include impunity and weak rule of law, the misuse of legal measures, insufficient protection in law or practice of the right to freedom of expression and media independence, the inability of institutions to adapt to fast-changing technological developments, and a lack of accountability, transparency and human rights due diligence on the part of digital platforms.   While States and their conduct in practice and regulation play a central role in the spread of disinformation, it is also facilitated by new digital technologies, artificial intelligence, and the business models of the largest technology companies. Social media platforms and search engines, programmed to optimize the spread of inflammatory content, targeted advertising and the data-harvesting practices of companies drive users towards extreme content and conspiracy theories in ways that feed and amplify disinformation, while diminishing users’ capacities to develop their own views.   In accordance with the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, technology and social media companies have a responsibility to prevent, mitigate and remedy human rights abuses; this includes refraining from amplifying or ignoring disinformation that features or perpetuates false and violent content for the sake of engagement and profit.   The State must protect against human rights abuses, including by business enterprises, and take appropriate steps to prevent, investigate, punish and redress such abuse through effective policies, legislation, regulations, adjudication and international cooperation. However, both State and businesses’ responses to threats to human rights have been inadequate and inappropriate.   Often in collaboration with States and other actors, technology companies wield control over information at the expense of the public by having access to an unprecedented volume of data. The asymmetry of power in favour of the profit-driven businesses is enhanced by keeping digital advertising processes complex and opaque, with minimal human oversight.   New and emerging technologies play a vital role in creating and disseminating disinformation. On social platforms, in particular, users upload information, which algorithms then position based on its virality. Platforms can create echo chambers, allowing false narratives to take root and spread within specific communities. This can reinforce existing biases, incite hatred, fuel stereotyping and prevent exposure to diverse perspectives.   As for the individual spreaders of disinformation online, one survey indicates that influencers and personalities (according to 47% of respondents), along with national politicians (also referenced by 47% of respondents), are seen as the biggest threat worldwide.   Artificial intelligence has significantly amplified these challenges. Artificial intelligence-powered tools can generate convincing fake content, including deepfakes (manipulated videos and audio) that are increasingly difficult for humans to detect as manipulated.   Artificial intelligence algorithms can also be used to automate the creation and dissemination of disinformation campaigns, allowing malicious actors to operate at scale and speed, overwhelming traditional fact-checking and content moderation efforts.   Disinformation may challenge access to the free flow of information because it can silence some voices or come to dominate the information space, making it more difficult for people to assess the source of information. This weakens the ability to form informed opinions, participate meaningfully in democratic processes and make informed decisions about one’s life.   Access to health-related information is considered an underlying determinant of the right to health, and entails the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas concerning health issues. False claims about the causes, treatments or prevention of diseases can have serious consequences for public health.   Misleading information about vaccines, for example, can lead to vaccine hesitancy and lower vaccination rates, jeopardizing public health efforts. The World Health Organization (WHO) has noted the negative impact of disinformation on preparedness and response to health emergencies, and on people’s physical and mental health.   Disinformation also has a negative impact on the right, as recognized by the General Assembly, to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. It undercuts the procedural components of that right: access to information, public participation and access to justice. It also erodes the substantive components in terms of undermining environmental rule-making and the implementation of standards.   Disinformation affects women in specific ways due to existing gender inequalities and discriminatory social norms. Disinformation targeting women often exploits gender-based stereotypes, reinforces misogyny and uses sexualized or violent narratives to silence and marginalize their voices, particularly in public life.   Disinformation particularly harms historically and systemically marginalized groups, including racial, ethnic and religious minorities, Indigenous Peoples, and other socially excluded communities, such as persons experiencing homelessness. It reinforces stereotypes, spreads falsehoods, incites discrimination and ultimately deepens existing inequalities.   Racially charged disinformation, in particular, has been used to scapegoat communities, distort historical narratives and justify exclusionary or repressive policies.   Disinformation is often deployed to amplify existing prejudices and social hierarchies. Marginalized groups are frequent targets of false narratives that dehumanize or criminalize them or delegitimize their presence in public discourse. These tactics further erode trust in institutions, contribute to social division and diminish political participation among affected communities.   Disinformation poses a profound threat to human rights defenders, undermining their work, safety and legitimacy. Deliberate campaigns of false or misleading information are used to delegitimize human rights advocacy, discredit defenders and restrict civic space. These attacks involve State and non-State actors exploiting digital platforms to manipulate narratives, incite public hostility and justify surveillance, harassment or criminalization.   An emergent concern identified in the study is disinformation specifically directed at “human rights”, the United Nations system, multilateralism and multiculturalism. Disinformation campaigns increasingly use false information to discredit the general notion of international cooperation and to erode international and regional human rights institutions, international law, United Nations entities, in particular certain agencies, high-level United Nations representatives and international and supranational courts.   Furthermore, such disinformation campaigns are aimed at delegitimizing the work of human rights organizations by portraying them as biased, corrupt or foreign agents. Such disinformation can be applied in a deliberate attempt to distort the understanding of human rights and international law.   Human rights treaties are deliberately misrepresented in order to undermine their public and political support. This creates an environment in which the upholding and progressive development of human rights standards are undermined, and human rights violations are more likely to occur or go unchallenged.   Armed conflicts are fertile ground for disinformation. Disinformation is used to justify the conflict, shift responsibilities and dehumanize the enemy, other groups or populations.   Today, disinformation is considered a key part of information or hybrid warfare. The Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression has noted that digital technology has made it easier for States and non-State actors to interfere in conflicts from across borders.   She has highlighted that State-led disinformation has a potent impact on human rights, the rule of law, democratic processes, national sovereignty and geopolitical stability because of the resources and reach of States and because of their ability to simultaneously suppress independent voices so that there can be no challenge to the official narratives.   Disinformation in armed conflict is all the more devastating, as the right to information in armed conflict functions as a “survival right”, upon which people’s lives, health and safety directly depend.66 Disinformation in conflict zones can misdirect civilians into danger, create panic and undermine humanitarian efforts. It affects not only conflict and warfare, but also peacekeeping and monitoring.   Lack of access to conflict zones by journalists greatly enables the spread of State propaganda and disinformation. The warring countries’ State-owned and State-controlled media can create and amplify disinformation on air, in print and on social media platforms.   Disinformation poses a profound threat to democratic processes, including elections. Election integrity and information integrity are closely connected. By manipulating public opinion, eroding trust and distorting decision-making, disinformation undermines the integrity of elections, weakens democratic institutions and polarizes societies.   Disinformation campaigns can be used to suppress dissent and manipulate political narratives. In that regard, disinformation can be weaponized by political actors in pursuit of specific political objectives. In particular, populist politicians and authoritarian Governments resort to information manipulation, which in turn is enabled and amplified by digital technology into a tsunami of disinformation, misinformation and hate speech.   Modern societies depend on epistemic trust, which allows ordinary people to rely on scientific conclusions as reliable and relevant guidance for their lives. Disinformation ruptures this trust by undermining peoples’ ability to distinguish between reliable and unreliable sources.   “Conspiracy theories” – deliberate instruments of disinformation campaigns – provide simple, emotionally satisfying narratives that reduce scientific complexity and nuance to simplistic dualities.   “Conspiracy theories” create false equivalence by presenting theories based on disinformation as legitimate alternatives to scientific consensus. To undermine established science, disinformation is directed at traditional science-generating entities such as universities, public health agencies and climate research bodies.   For decades, major fossil fuel corporations and other businesses, including in the chemicals, plastics and agroindustry sectors, have been funding efforts to cast doubt on environmental science and delay global action to protect the environment.   They have exploited insufficient regulatory frameworks and the absence of adequate accountability to undermine awareness of the severity of the triple planetary crisis and redirect responsibility to consumers; falsely framed emissions reduction as economically unfeasible; promoted ineffective and unproven technological solutions; launched targeted campaigns against scientists, whistle-blowers and environmental human rights defenders; and used litigation, such as strategic litigation against public participation, to counter efforts to hold them accountable for their human rights and environmental violations.   Today, environmental disinformation is spread through a vast number of methods targeting a broad range of issues beyond climate change, including land degradation, plastic and chemical pollution, extractive activities and food and water security.   Disinformation not only distorts public understanding of environmental issues, but also actively obstructs policymaking. It undermines urgent climate action, including for a just transition, and erodes public trust in climate science by spreading false narratives about climate science, policy and solutions.   The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has argued that climate disinformation contributes to misperceptions of the scientific consensus, creates uncertainty and disregards the risk and urgency of the climate crisis.   The Secretary-General has warned that the ability to disseminate large-scale disinformation undermines scientifically established facts is an existential risk to humanity.   All States should create and foster an environment in which everyone has access to reliable, accurate and evidence-based information, and in which the value of that information is affirmed.   States should strengthen efforts through policy frameworks, regulations and the development of national action plans on business and human rights to hold social media and artificial intelligence companies responsible for respecting human rights and implementing practices on due diligence, transparency and accountability, as outlined in the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and other relevant United Nations frameworks.   Lies spread faster than the truth. These problems are about to become exponentially bigger with the omnipresence of artificial intelligence, pushing societies into an epistemological crisis - (how we know things, what knowledge is, and how we prove what is true).. http://docs.un.org/en/A/HRC/61/68   June 2026   Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Irene Khan.   In this report, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression examines how the intersection of public and private powers and the convergence of geopolitical and corporate interests driving the digital revolution is advancing a new global agenda on freedom of opinion and expression and exploiting the vulnerabilities of this right.   She analyses the wider implications of the paradigm shift in the governance of freedom of opinion and expression. She examines how States, aided, abetted and aggravated by new technologies, are reducing the space for freedom of opinion and expression, online and offline, and its negative impact on gender inequality, children’s safety and media decline.   The Special Rapporteur looks at the governance, oligarchic structure and culture of large digital platforms and artificial intelligence companies, as well as the complex relations between the corporate actors and States, from regulation and adjudication to collusion and co-optation. She concludes by drawing attention to the reforms and initiatives seeking to reclaim and revitalize freedom of opinion and expression as a fundamental pillar of democracy and sustainable development.   http://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/hrbodies/hrcouncil/sessions-regular/session62/advance-versions/a-hrc-62-67-aev.pdf Visit the related web page
	View more stories