Pakistan teen influencer killed after 'rejecting' man
Sana Yousaf, who turned 17 last week and had more than a million followers across her social media accounts, was killed at her home in the capital Islamabad on Monday evening. The police have arrested a 22-year-old on suspicion of her murder who spent hours loitering outside her home.
"It was a case of repeated rejections. The boy was trying to reach out to her time and again," Islamabad police chief Syed Ali Nasir Rizvi said during a news conference. "It was a gruesome and cold-blooded murder," Rizvi added. Yousaf had more than 800,000 followers on TikTok, a wildly popular platform in Pakistan, where she posted lip-sync videos, skincare tips, and promotional content for beauty products. The last video posted on her account was hours before her murder, in which she was seen cutting a cake for her birthday.
"Rest in Peace" and "Justice for Sana", read some comments under the video. Violence against women is pervasive in Pakistan according to the country's Human Rights Commission, and cases of women being attacked after rejecting marriage proposals are not uncommon. In 2021, 27-year-old Noor Mukadam was beheaded by her Pakistani-American boyfriend, Zahir Jaffer, after she rejected his marriage proposal in a case that sparked widespread anger. In 2016, Khadija Siddiqui survived being stabbed 23 times by a jilted ex-boyfriend.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Observer
a day ago
- Observer
US halts missile shipments, sparking worry in Kyiv
KYIV: A decision by Washington to halt some shipments of critical weapons to Ukraine triggered warnings in Kyiv on Wednesday that the move would weaken its ability to defend against intensifying Russian air strikes and battlefield advances. Ukraine said it had called in the acting US envoy in Kyiv to stress the importance of continuing military aid from Washington, saying any cut-off would embolden Russia as diplomatic efforts to end the war falter. The Pentagon's pause due to concerns that US stockpiles are too low came in recent days and includes precision munitions and air defence interceptors that knock down Russian drones and missiles, two people familiar with the decision said on Tuesday. "The Ukrainian side emphasised that any delay or procrastination in supporting Ukraine's defense capabilities will only encourage the aggressor to continue the war and terror, rather than seek peace," Kyiv's foreign ministry said in a statement. Ukraine's defence ministry said it had not been officially notified of any halt in US shipments and was seeking clarity from its American counterparts. Nato Secretary-General Mark Rutte said he understood the US needs to take care of its stockpiles. "But when it comes to Ukraine, in the short term, Ukraine cannot do without all the support it can get when it gets to ammunition and to air defense systems," Rutte said. Dozens of people have been killed in recent weeks during air strikes on Ukrainian cities, including the capital Kyiv, that have involved hundreds of attack drones in addition to ballistic and cruise missiles. Russian forces, which control about a fifth of Ukraine, have also made gains in a grinding summer campaign in the east. Since US President Donald Trump took office in January, he has softened Washington's position toward Russia, seeking a diplomatic solution to the war and raising doubts about future US military support for Kyiv's war effort. Last week, Trump said he was considering selling more Patriot air defense missiles to Ukraine following a meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky. Politico, which reported the pause on Tuesday, said it includes the critical Patriot air defence missiles which Ukraine has relied on to destroy fast-moving ballistic missiles. Fedir Venislavskyi, a member of the Ukrainian parliament's national security and defense committee, called the decision to halt the shipments "very unpleasant for us". "It's painful, and against the background of the terrorist attacks which Russia commits against Ukraine, it's a very unpleasant situation," he told reporters in Kyiv. In an email, the Pentagon said it was providing Trump with options to continue military aid to Ukraine in line with the goal of ending Russia's war there. "At the same time, the department is rigorously examining and adapting its approach to achieving this objective while also preserving US forces' readiness for administration defense priorities," said Elbridge Colby, the undersecretary for policy. All weapons aid was briefly paused in February with a second, longer pause in March. The Trump administration resumed sending the last of the aid approved under Biden but no new policy has been announced. The Kremlin on Wednesday welcomed the news of a halt, saying the conflict would end sooner if fewer arms flowed to Ukraine. Residents in the Ukrainian capital, where missile strikes on residential neighbourhoods over the past two weeks had killed more than two dozen people, expressed alarm at the Pentagon's decision. "If we end up in a situation where there's no air defence left, I will move (out of Kyiv), because my safety is my first concern," Oksana Kurochkina, a 35-year-old lawyer said in central Kyiv. "I am already having thoughts about moving out now." On the battlefield, a halt in precision munitions would limit the capacity of Ukrainian troops to strike Russian positions farther behind the front line, said Jack Watling, a military analyst at the Royal United Services Institute. "In short, this decision will cost Ukrainian lives and territory." — Reuters
Observer
a day ago
- Observer
Conflict communication: Then and now
As the digital landscape develops, the confluence between social media and conflict becomes an integral part of the narrative. A myriad of stories, perceptions, fake information, and imagery can ignite or amplify tensions. Artificial intelligence and social media have the potential to polarise or create scenarios with real-world implications. In times of war and conflict, government officials and influential figures address the public with messages in support of one side. Typically, it employs hostile narratives, propaganda, and disinformation for the convenient simplification of complex scenarios. This communication strategy is fertile ground for spreading deception and misinformation, but also for rallying support. In the past, the mainstream media aligned with the countries' governments, and their policies to play the drums for 'saving the world' from dictators and armaments; now, however, there is a fragmented media landscape in which people rely on social media such as Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, and X (formerly Twitter) for information or to ally with peers who share similar ideologies. Then-prime minister Tony Blair led the United Kingdom to war in Iraq in 2003 based on 'unquestionable intelligence' regarding weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), and the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. The goals of the war for the United States were to free the Iraqi people, remove WMDs from the country, and stop Saddam Hussein from supporting terrorism. The British newspapers on Fleet Street championed Tony Blair's 'journey' to Baghdad. Years later, the former prime minister apologised for the use of 'wrong intelligence' in the run-up to the war. The intelligence report was presented as fact, rather than information that may not be accurate. The media didn't play the drums as enthusiastically as it did pre-war. There are journalistic lessons yet to be learned. Two decades later, the ghosts of the Iraq War still haunt the region. The 'mission accomplished' staged by the President of the United States, George W. Bush, has barely materialised. Media organisations have failed and continue to fail in addressing the numerous military interventions in the region. The trumpets are still blowing. The mainstream media often offers one-sided, biased coverage. There are political barriers and ideological challenges; also, there is usually a gap in examining the political and historical context of the conflict. In today's digital landscape, people increasingly turn away from mainstream media for information. A vast array of channels is available, each offering either accurate information or potentially harmful misinformation. While social platforms facilitate quicker and decentralised communication, they also contribute to societal division. Social media is increasingly influencing conflict and contentious politics. The ongoing conflict between Israel and Gaza exemplifies how wars are now intertwined with social media. From images depicting military action to narratives crafted by various participants, the impact is significant. Yet, while offering alternative narratives and perspectives, social platforms are filling the gaps and addressing the vacuums in mainstream media coverage. The negative side is that, at the core of war rhetoric, there is a chaotic, senseless, and unreliable flow of information. Recent media studies suggest a staggering amount of artificial intelligence-generated misinformation online, as a result of the Israel-Iran war. According to a BBC article, the writers indicate that outdated clips and AI-generated content are being shared as real events, with X users turning to the platform's AI chatbot-Grok to establish the posts' veracity. In some cases, Grok asserted that the AI videos were authentic. Social media news, especially about war, can mislead and give a false sense of understanding. The global political landscape and interest relations have become more complex. Even though social media merely offers snippets of selective information, it has added a new dimension to how conflict plays out both online and on the ground.
Observer
2 days ago
- Observer
Living in an era of online lies and fakes
With the emergence of various digital platforms, journalistic practices have undergone significant changes in recent years. While these changes have introduced innovative forms of communication, they have also created opportunities for disinformation, commonly referred to as 'fake news'. Defining fake news is a contentious issue, although most people recognise the common understanding of what it involves: reports that are deliberately fabricated, often malicious and politically motivated, disseminated on social media and sometimes produced for cash. Those 'fake news outlets', as we know, do not adhere to the editorial standards and processes that traditional news media employ to ensure the accuracy and credibility of information. It mimics the content and format of legitimate news media while intersecting with various types of misinformation. However, fabricated stories masquerading as serious journalism are unlikely to disappear, as they have become a lucrative avenue for some writers and a potential means to influence public opinion. We should anticipate their prevalence during any major event, as evidenced during the Covid-19 pandemic, when misinformation reached unprecedented levels. In wars and conflicts, such stories serve as a primary weapon. For example, as soon as you get out of bed and check your phone, a video appears showing what appears to be an air strike, accompanied by a post claiming that missiles have been launched. In moments like this, when tensions are high in the country where you live, it can evoke a sense of panic. In the recent military confrontations between Israel and Iran, as well as the conflicts between India and Pakistan, the most disturbing aspect was that the battles did not occur solely in the skies or on the ground. Instead, they unfolded on platforms such as WhatsApp, X, Telegram and Facebook, where footage from past conflicts was circulated as breaking news. Images and videos from Syria, Gaza and Yemen have been misrepresented in this manner, including deepfake videos that portray fabricated speeches by national leaders, which fuel warmongering, provocation, rumours and fears. A video claiming to show an explosion caused by a Pakistani counter-attack was found to be from an explosion at the main port of the Lebanese capital of Beirut in 2020. The so-called wannabe nationalists in different countries became their wholesalers! However, when news can spread across the globe in seconds, merely labelling its source does little to stem the flow of misinformation. Few users take the time to verify the origins of the information they share and mainstream media has been known to publish stories that lack accuracy. 'In today's world, it is very easy to create, modify, fabricate and widely share various messages. The information environment is polluted in many ways. Even if the information itself is genuine, it might be used out of context and transformed into a tool for propaganda,' writes HiveMind in the Commons Library newsletter while defining disinformation. But what significant is that fact-checking by online users has been helpful in correcting people's misconceptions. As a result, individuals are changing their minds after encountering these debunks, even when the original misinformation aligned with their beliefs. Agencies like the International Fact-Checking Network have coordinated efforts among their accredited members in verifying the facts before the broadcast of the reports. News agencies such as Reuters, BBC and AFP Fact Check all actively took extra efforts to debunk those false claims. It is welcoming that Meta in early January, announced a controversial shift in its approach to disinformation, replacing independent fact-checkers on Facebook and Instagram with a Community Notes-style system. Still, a significant lack of media literacy persists, hindering the ability to evaluate the credibility of news sources. This underscores the urgent need for education focused on identifying fake news. After all, we all need to become more sophisticated consumers of news!
