Editing Openai/68d939c2-bda4-800e-9458-75c5a750aa3c (section)

==== “Misinformation” here means false or misleading statements (whether intentional or not) about the identity plan. Some key points: ====
* Already, one widely circulated claim is that the UK government plans to mandate identity implants (e.g. microchips under the skin) to access services like banking or healthcare. That is false: Reuters fact-checked that claim and found no credible announcement, and a government spokesperson denied it. Reuters<ref>{{cite web|title=Reuters|url=https://www.reuters.com/fact-check/no-uk-announcement-compulsory-id-implants-contrary-claims-2025-03-06/|publisher=reuters.com|access-date=2025-11-12}}</ref>
* There is confusion (and deliberate framing) about whether this is a “card” (physical) or only digital. Some voices are stating “identity card” even though the government insists it will be digital-only (no requirement to carry a physical card). For example, on social media, some local officials or MP offices have posted that “it is not a card” to correct that misinformation. Facebook<ref>{{cite web|title=Facebook|url=https://www.facebook.com/cateccleslabour/photos/there-has-been-lots-of-misinformation-and-worry-following-todays-announcement-ab/1113646034291442/|publisher=facebook.com|access-date=2025-11-12}}</ref>
* In past consultations, the government has flagged that responses and commentary included many “misconceptions” (according to the Cabinet Office) about things like: that the system would lead to mass government surveillance, that it would require citizens to give up cash, that it would allow arbitrary data sharing by government, that it would be mandatory for all services (not just right-to-work), or that it would constitute a “social credit” system. Global Government Forum<ref>{{cite web|title=Global Government Forum|url=https://www.globalgovernmentforum.com/uk-government-responds-to-digital-id-misconceptions-after-public-consultation/|publisher=Global Government Forum|access-date=2025-11-12}}</ref>
* Some commentary amplifies fears of “Big Brother states,” “mass surveillance,” “tech giants having access to citizens’ data,” “the government selling or sharing personal data with private firms,” or “tying identity to bank accounts” in a future social credit system. Some of these are speculative or worst-case extrapolations rather than based on the current proposal. The Verge<ref>{{cite web|title=The Verge|url=https://thred.com/tech/new-mandatory-digital-id-for-uk-residents-sparks-controversy/|publisher=The Verge|access-date=2025-11-12}}</ref>
* Opposition parties and civil liberties groups are also raising strong language that sometimes edges into rhetorical exaggeration. For instance, Big Brother Watch calls the plans “wholly unBritish” and suggests it would build a “domestic mass surveillance infrastructure.” Wikipedia<ref>{{cite web|title=Wikipedia|url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BritCard|publisher=en.wikipedia.org|access-date=2025-11-12}}</ref>
* On the public side, reactions on social media include phrases such as “digital enslavement,” “tyranny,” “CIA / surveillance state tech,” claims that this is “another step toward China’s social credit system,” etc. Some of these are obviously political rhetoric and speculative. Thred Website<ref>{{cite web|title=Thred Website|url=https://thred.com/tech/new-mandatory-digital-id-for-uk-residents-sparks-controversy/|publisher=Thred Website|access-date=2025-11-12}}</ref>

So the misinformation is non-trivial. It’s not confined to fringe corners; it’s being discussed by journalists, civil society organizations, opposition parties, and amplified via social media.

That said, in terms of volume (how many people are sharing it, how viral it is) we don’t yet have publicly available, reliable metrics. But the fact that fact-checkers are already having to debunk claims (e.g. about implants) suggests it’s significant enough to warrant response.