#FactCheck - AI-Generated Clip of Lion Carrying Woman Shared as Real Incident
Executive Summary
A video circulating on social media shows a lion carrying away a woman who was washing clothes near a pond. Users are sharing the clip claiming it depicts a real incident. However, research by CyberPeace found the viral claim to be false. The research revealed that the video is not real but AI-generated.
Claim
A user on Facebook shared the viral video claiming that a lion attacked and carried away a woman from a pond while she was washing clothes. The link to the post and its archived version are provided below
Fact Check:
Upon closely examining the viral clip, we noticed several visual inconsistencies that raised suspicion about its authenticity. The video was then analyzed using the AI-detection tool Sightengine. According to the analysis results, the viral video was identified as AI-generated.
Conclusion
The research confirms that the viral video does not depict a real incident. The clip is digitally created using artificial intelligence and is being falsely shared as a genuine event.
Related Blogs
Executive Summary
Amid the ongoing tensions between the United States, Israel, and Iran, a video circulating on social media claims that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was seen running after Iran launched an attack on Israel. However, research by the CyberPeace found the viral claim to be misleading. Our research revealed that the video has no connection with the current tensions between the United States, Israel, and Iran. In reality, the clip dates back to 2021, when Netanyahu was rushing inside Israel’s parliament to cast his vote after arriving late.
Claim:
On the social media platform X (formerly Twitter), a user shared the video on March 5, 2026, claiming that Netanyahu had fled and gone into hiding due to fear of Iran. The post included inflammatory remarks suggesting that Iran had demonstrated its power and that Netanyahu had abandoned his country out of fear.
Fact Check
To verify the authenticity of the video, we extracted several keyframes and conducted a reverse image search on Google. During the research, we found the same video on the official X account of Benjamin Netanyahu, posted on December 14, 2021. In the post, Netanyahu wrote in Hebrew, which translates to,“I am always proud to run for you. Photographed half an hour ago in the Knesset.”
Further research also led us to a Hebrew news website where the same video was published.
According to the report, voting in the Knesset (Israel’s parliament) continued throughout the night, and an explosives-related bill was passed by a very narrow margin. At the time, opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu was in his room inside the Knesset building. When he was called for the vote, he hurried through the parliament corridors to reach the chamber in time to cast his vote.
Conclusion:
Our research found that the viral video is unrelated to the ongoing tensions involving the United States, Israel, and Iran. The footage is from 2021 and shows Benjamin Netanyahu rushing inside the Knesset to participate in a parliamentary vote after being called in at the last moment.
Introduction
In the age of digital technology, the concept of net neutrality has become more crucial for preserving the equity and openness of the internet. Thanks to net neutrality, all internet traffic is treated equally, without difference or preferential treatment. Thanks to this concept, users can freely access and distribute content, which promotes innovation, competition, and the democratisation of knowledge. India has seen controversy over net neutrality, which has led to a legal battle to protect an open internet. In this blog post, we’ll look at the challenges of the law and the efforts made to safeguard net neutrality in India.
Background on Net Neutrality in India
Net neutrality became a hot topic in India after a major telecom service provider suggested charging various fees for accessing different parts of the internet. Internet users, activists, and organisations in favour of an open internet raised concern over this. Millions of comments were made on the consultation document by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) published in 2015, highlighting the significance of net neutrality for the country’s internet users.
Legal Battle and Regulatory Interventions
The battle for net neutrality in India acquired notoriety when TRAI released the “Prohibition of Discriminatory Tariffs for Data Services Regulations” in 2016. These laws, often known as the “Free Basics” prohibition, were created to put an end to the usage of zero-rating platforms, which exempt specific websites or services from data expenses. The regulations ensured that all data on the internet would be handled uniformly, regardless of where it originated.
But the legal conflict didn’t end there. The telecom industry challenged TRAI’s regulations, resulting in a flurry of legal conflicts in numerous courts around the country. The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act and its provisions of it that control TRAI’s ability to regulate internet services were at the heart of the legal dispute.
The Indian judicial system greatly helped the protection of net neutrality. The importance of non-discriminatory internet access was highlighted in 2018 when the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) upheld the TRAI regulations and ruled in favour of net neutrality. The TDSAT ruling created a crucial precedent for net neutrality in India. In 2019, after several rounds of litigation, the Supreme Court of India backed the principles of net neutrality, declaring that it is a fundamental idea that must be protected. The nation’s legislative framework for preserving a free and open internet was bolstered by the ruling by the top court.
Ongoing Challenges and the Way Forward
Even though India has made great strides towards upholding net neutrality, challenges persist. Because of the rapid advancement of technology and the emergence of new services and platforms, net neutrality must always be safeguarded. Some practices, such as “zero-rating” schemes and service-specific data plans, continue to raise questions about potential violations of net neutrality principles. Regulatory efforts must be proactive and under constant watch to allay these worries. The regulatory organisation, TRAI, is responsible for monitoring for and responding to breaches of the net neutrality principles. It’s crucial to strike a balance between promoting innovation and competition and maintaining a free and open internet.
Additionally, public awareness and education on the issue are crucial for the continuation of net neutrality. By informing users of their rights and promoting involvement in the conversation, a more inclusive and democratic decision-making process is assured. Civil society organisations and advocacy groups may successfully educate the public about net neutrality and gain their support.
Conclusion
The legal battle for net neutrality in India has been a significant turning point in the campaign to preserve an open and neutral internet. A robust framework for net neutrality in the country has been established thanks to legislative initiatives and judicial decisions. However, due to ongoing challenges and the dynamic nature of technology, maintaining net neutrality calls for vigilant oversight and strong actions. An open and impartial internet is crucial for fostering innovation, increasing free speech, and providing equal access to information. India’s attempts to uphold net neutrality should motivate other nations dealing with similar issues. All parties, including politicians, must work together to protect the principles of net neutrality and ensure that the Internet is accessible to everyone.
Executive Summary
A video of BJP MP Ravi Kishan is being widely circulated on social media with the claim that the Gorakhpur MP was mocking Prime Minister Narendra Modi and criticizing his working style and frequent foreign visits.In the viral clip, Ravi Kishan can be heard saying that “he likes to travel,” “comes to Parliament only for a few minutes,” and does not like pressure or responsibility. The clip also features him using phrases such as “azad panchhi” (free bird) and “azad parinda.” However, CyberPeace Research Wingresearch found the claim to be misleading. The research revealed that in the original video, Ravi Kishan was actually criticizing Congress leader Rahul Gandhi. A cropped portion of his statement is being shared out of context with a false claim.
Claim
An X (formerly Twitter) user shared the viral clip and wrote that Ravi Kishan was referring to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, alleging that Modi enjoys travelling abroad, spends little time in Parliament, and feels uncomfortable under pressure.
- https://x.com/Aarti202/status/2058523226305900586
- https://archive.ph/j5MaV
Fact Check
To verify the viral claim, we performed a reverse search using key frames from the video. During the research, we found the original video uploaded on the Facebook page of ANI on May 13, 2026.
The caption of the post read:“War does not seem to be ending…” Ravi Kishan warns the country about the ongoing conflict in the Middle East.At around the 4-minute-40-second timestamp, an ANI reporter asks Ravi Kishan about Rahul Gandhi distancing himself from the CBI Director selection process. Responding to that question, Ravi Kishan makes the remarks that later went viral.
This clearly establishes that Ravi Kishan was not referring to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, but was commenting on Rahul Gandhi. In his response, he says that “it is good that he has freed himself” and refers to Rahul Gandhi as an “azad parinda” (free bird).
During the research, we also found the same video posted on Ravi Kishan’s official X account on May 23. The caption of the post stated:“Congress should now free its prince Rahul Gandhi.”This further confirms that the viral clip has been misleadingly edited and shared out of context
Conclusion
The research found that Ravi Kishan’s remarks in the original video were directed at Rahul Gandhi, not Prime Minister Narendra Modi. An edited portion of the video has been falsely shared with a misleading claim.
