Heart stents save Lives not heart disease

By Raheel Waqar I attended a workshop under the project titled “Digital Trust and Free Expression in the AI Era” at the Department of Media and Development Communication, University of the Punjab, supported by the U.S. Mission to Pakistan in partnership with the Pakistan-U.S. Alumni Network (PUAN) last week. During the discussions on digital trust, I remembered that a few months ago, I received a call from a friend who is a small business owner and runs a modest page selling handcrafted candles. She told me that her posts had suddenly stopped getting reaching people. No warning. No explanation. Her engagement dropped overnight, and when she contacted the platform, she received a flat, nonanswer. She wasn’t banned. She wasn’t warned. She was just… quieter. That is essentially the shadow-ban dilemma, and I believe it is one of the least discussed problems of trust in the age of AI. There is a reason for algorithmic moderation exists. The volume of content shared on a platform daily is far too large to be managed by humans alone. AI systems can now detect hate speech, misinformation, spam, and harassment faster than an entire team of human moderators. Theoretically, this creates a safer and more livable Internet. But where I differ from current structure is that moderation operates as black box, and the worst offender is shadow banning, silently restricting a user without informing them. If a platform explicitly rejects you, you can appeal, argue, or move on. Shadow-banning removes even the most basic dignity. You face punishment without knowing the charges; you are not shown the evidence and are rarely given any avenues for reclamation. I genuinely believe that trust is the digital currency. We bring our voices, our business, and our relationships to these platforms, expecting something close to a level playing field, even if imperfect. Shadow-banning violates that implied contract. It assumes the rules are clear while relying opaque algorithms, and doubt becomes corrosive. Users begin to question each drop in engagement. Was it the algorithm? Was it just a bad week? Did I say something wrong? This uncertainty leads to confusion and self-censorship, which is not healthy foundation for a digital public square. Moreover, the phenomenon of shadow-banning disproportionately effects those without influence, legal support, or the media visibility. A major creator, with millions of followers, may get a quick, individualized explanation when something goes wrong. My friend, the candle-seller, heard nothing. This imbalance is significant if free expression online is to be practiced, not not merely discussed — by everyone. I don’t believe that the solution is to eliminate moderation entirely. The combination of harassment, spam, and bad-faith users who overwhelm others makes a total freeforall unusable within minutes. As anyone who has used an unmoderated platform knows how quickly it becomes impossible to navigate when spam and abuse take over. When people are constantly shouted down, free expression is not free. However, there is a difference between moderation and invisible moderation. Platforms can reduce the reach of harmful content without disrespecting or degrading the users by withholding explanations. The technology to notify users already exists. What is missing is the will. In my own re-design of this system, three principles would guide it: A user should be notified, not in a lucky screenshot of a “test” a month later, but in a clear, timely notice to explain the general reason that their content or reach is being limited. It is not theatre; it is meaningful appeal. Many platforms claim to offer appeals, but these are often routed to another algorithm or a human who skims for a few seconds. Real appeal is a true second look with actual power to correct an error. Not all infractions are equal and deserve the same silence and indefinite containment. It is not the same as coordinated harassment campaigns; it is not borderline, or an honest mistake, or satire. There is nothing impossible for this. It is a matter of priorities. Transparency costs platforms something; it exposes them to scrutiny and disagreement. I am not opposed to algorithmic moderation. Used responsibly, it can make the internet more habitable space for all, particularly for those who are disproportionately targeted by harassment and abuse. However, moderation that is not transparent is not safety; it is control disguised as safety. In a world where artificial intelligence systems increasingly decide who is heard and who is quietly muted, we must hold these systems accountable for their explanations. Platforms that merely claim that they know how to handle moderation, do not build trust. Trust is constructed by showing their work. Shadow-banning is not just a technical issue; it is a question of what kind of digital public square we want to inhabit and whether we will insist on honest, accountable moderation. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the U.S. Mission to Pakistan or USEFP/PUAN. Raheel Waqar is a student of Media and Development Communication at University of the Punjab, Lahore and can be reached at raheelwaqar540@gmail.com.

The introduction of FRAMES marks an important milestone in Sindh’s journey towards digital governance. Rather than relying on conventional attendance registers that have long served as the primary means of recording staff attendance, the School Education & Literacy Department (SE&LD) has embraced facial recognition technology to create a more transparent, secure and efficient monitoring system. The initiative reflects a broader vision of leveraging technology to improve governance, enhance institutional performance and ultimately create a better learning environment for students. For decades, education departments across Pakistan have struggled with administrative challenges that extend beyond teaching and learning. Manual attendance systems, paper-based reporting, delayed verification processes and fragmented administrative records have often limited the ability of education authorities to monitor schools effectively. In a province with thousands of public schools and a large teaching workforce, ensuring regular attendance and maintaining accurate records through traditional methods has remained a formidable challenge. Recognising these issues, the Government of Sindh has sought to replace outdated administrative practices with a technology-driven solution. FRAMES enables teaching and non-teaching staff to verify their attendance using facial recognition technology. Once authenticated, attendance records are securely captured and transmitted to a central monitoring platform, allowing authorised education officials to access real-time information regarding staff attendance across schools. Unlike conventional attendance registers that require manual compilation and verification, FRAMES introduces automation into one of the most fundamental administrative functions within the education sector. The result is not merely a change in attendance recording but a transformation in how educational institutions are monitored and managed. One of the distinguishing features of FRAMES is its ability to function both online and offline. This capability addresses one of the most practical challenges facing digital governance in developing regions. Internet connectivity remains inconsistent in several rural and remote areas of Sindh, making continuous online operation difficult for many schools. Recognising this reality, FRAMES has been designed using an offline-first architecture. Even when internet connectivity is unavailable, teachers and school staff can authenticate their attendance through facial recognition. The application securely stores attendance records on the device and automatically synchronises the data with the central server as soon as internet connectivity is restored. This intelligent synchronisation mechanism ensures that schools continue to operate without disruption while maintaining the integrity and reliability of attendance records. By eliminating dependence on uninterrupted internet access, FRAMES becomes a practical solution for schools across diverse geographical regions of the province. The importance of this feature cannot be overstated. Many digital initiatives fail because they assume ideal technological conditions that do not always exist in the field. By accommodating connectivity limitations, FRAMES demonstrates a realistic understanding of the operational environment within Sindh’s public education system. Beyond attendance verification, FRAMES represents a broader shift towards data-driven governance. Modern public administration increasingly depends on accurate, timely and reliable data to formulate effective policies. Every authenticated attendance record contributes to a growing repository of administrative information that can assist education managers in analysing attendance trends, identifying operational challenges and making informed policy decisions. Real-time monitoring significantly enhances administrative responsiveness. Instead of waiting for monthly reports or manual inspections, district and provincial authorities can obtain immediate insights into attendance patterns. Persistent absenteeism, staffing shortages or unusual attendance trends can be identified promptly, enabling faster interventions and more efficient resource allocation. The implementation of FRAMES also strengthens institutional accountability. Public institutions derive credibility from transparency, consistency and fairness. Digital attendance verification substantially reduces opportunities for manipulation associated with manual record keeping while creating an auditable electronic record of attendance. Such transparency not only improves administrative efficiency but also reinforces public confidence in government institutions. Across the world, education systems are increasingly adopting digital governance solutions to improve institutional performance. Countries in Asia, Europe and Africa have introduced biometric attendance systems, electronic education management platforms and digital monitoring tools to strengthen accountability within public education. International organisations, including UNESCO and the World Bank, have repeatedly emphasised that effective education governance depends upon reliable information systems capable of supporting evidence-based policymaking. Sindh’s adoption of FRAMES therefore aligns with broader international trends in educational management. While technology alone cannot resolve every challenge confronting the education sector, it provides administrators with the tools necessary to monitor institutional performance more effectively and allocate resources more strategically. The implementation of FRAMES also complements the Sindh Government’s wider digital transformation agenda within the School Education & Literacy Department. In recent years, the department has introduced several technology-based initiatives aimed at improving governance, financial transparency, administrative efficiency and public service delivery. Collectively, these reforms signal a transition from conventional bureaucratic practices towards modern digital administration. However, technological innovation alone is not sufficient to guarantee institutional success. The effectiveness of FRAMES will depend upon careful implementation, continuous evaluation and sustained capacity building. Teachers, head teachers and district administrators must receive comprehensive training to ensure that the system is used correctly and consistently. Technical support mechanisms must remain readily available to resolve operational issues quickly and minimise disruptions. Equally important is the need to strengthen digital infrastructure. Reliable electricity, functional devices and stable internet connectivity remain essential components of successful digital governance. Although the application’s offline functionality addresses connectivity constraints, long-term sustainability will require continued investment in technological infrastructure across public schools. Another important consideration relates to data privacy and cybersecurity. Because FRAMES utilises facial recognition technology, the protection of biometric information must remain a top priority. Clear policies governing data collection, storage, encryption and authorised access will be essential to maintaining public trust. International experience demonstrates that digital governance initiatives are most successful when supported by robust legal safeguards and transparent data protection frameworks. Some observers have expressed concerns regarding the growing use of artificial intelligence and biometric technologies within public institutions. These concerns deserve thoughtful consideration. Technology should always serve the interests of citizens rather than replace human judgement. Accordingly, FRAMES should be viewed as an administrative support system that strengthens institutional accountability without diminishing the role of educational leadership or professional responsibility. Indeed, educational quality ultimately depends upon far more than attendance alone.