#FactCheck - Misleading Viral Video Targets Rubika Liyaquat, Original Footage Tells Different Story
Executive Summary
A video circulating on social media claims that a Pakistani man misbehaved with TV anchor Rubika Liyaquat during a live television debate. Users sharing the clip alleged that the Pakistani participant silenced the anchor on live TV.
However, research by CyberPeace found the viral claim to be false and revealed that the video being shared on social media is edited. In the original video, published on YouTube on November 26, 2025, the alleged Pakistani man was not present in the TV debate.
Claim
On February 13, 2026, a user shared the viral clip on X (formerly Twitter), claiming that the anchor was insulted during the debate and was left speechless. Another user on February 11, 2026, asked News18 India to verify the video and questioned who allowed such behaviour towards the journalist on air.

Fact Check:
To verify the claim, we extracted key frames from the viral video and conducted a reverse image search using Google Lens. During the research, we found the full version of the debate uploaded on the official YouTube channel of News18 India on November 26, 2025. The nearly 40-minute original broadcast featured anchor Rubika Liyaquat along with panelists Zafar Islam, Varun Purohit, Prateek Kumar, Arvind Kumar Vajpayee, Tausif Ahmed Khan, and Aziz Khan. However, the person seen misbehaving with the anchor in the viral clip was not present in the original video.

Upon carefully reviewing the footage, we located the actual segment around the 25-minute 40-second mark. In this portion, the anchor can be heard asking panelist Tausif Ahmed Khan to leave the show, using the same words heard in the viral clip. However, the original broadcast does not feature any Pakistani participant or any individual named “Nadeem Shahzad.”

Conclusion
Our research found that the viral claim is false. The circulating video has been edited, and the alleged Pakistani participant does not appear in the original debate uploaded on November 26, 2025.
Related Blogs
.webp)
Introduction
Over-the-Top (OTT) streaming platforms have become a significant part of Indian entertainment consumption, offering users the ability to watch films, web series, and short-format videos directly online. These platforms operate on a subscription-based model, allowing for creative freedom, but they also lack clear accountability. On certain platforms, some content has been criticised for focusing on sensational or sexually explicit themes, particularly targeting young viewers seeking risqué entertainment. Such applications lack strong age verification mechanisms and offer ‘user access’ with minimal restrictions, which raises serious concerns about exposure to obscene content. This has triggered serious concerns among regulators, civil society organisations, advocacy and parental groups about the accessibility of such material and its potential influence, especially on minors.
Blocking order issued by the Ministry of Broadcasting and Information (MIB)
On 23rd July 2025, the Government of India, invoking powers under the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, has issued a ‘blocking order’ against 25 OTT platforms. A total of 26 websites and 14 mobile applications of the said OTT platforms were on the list, including several prominent OTT platforms for alleged distribution of obscene, vulgar and pornographic content in some cases. This regulatory action follows previous statutory advice and repeated warnings to the platforms in question, some of which continued to operate through new domains and disobeyed Indian laws and regulations.
This action was taken by the Ministry of Broadcasting and Information (MIB) in consultation with Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Women and Child Development, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Department of Legal Affairs, industry bodies and experts in the field of women rights and child rights.
The list of OTT Platforms covered under the said ‘Blocking Order’
The list includes - Big Shots App, Desiflix, Boomex, NeonX VIP, Navarasa Lite, Gulab App, Kangan App, Bull App, ShowHit, Jalva App, Wow Entertainment, Look Entertainment, Hitprime, Fugi, Feneo, ShowX, Sol Talkies, Adda TV, ALTT, HotX VIP, Hulchul App, MoodX, Triflicks, Ullu, and Mojflix.
The government has explicitly directed Internet Service Providers (ISP’s) to disable or remove public access to these websites within India.
Recent Judicial and Centre’s Interventions
- To refresh the memory, last year in March 2024, the Ministry of I&B blocked 18 OTT Platforms for Obscene and Vulgar Content.
- In April 2025, the Apex Court of India heard a petition on the prohibition of streaming of sexually explicit content on over-the-top (OTT) and social media platforms. In response to the petition, the Apex court stated, ‘It's not our domain, the centre has to take action and highlighted the need for executive action in the matter. The apex court has also issued notice to the Centre, OTT platforms, as well as social media platforms in response to a petition seeking a ban on sexually explicit content. (Uday Mahurkar & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. [WP(C) 313/2025])
- The following recent blocking order dated 23rd July 2025 by the Ministry of I&B is a welcome and commendable step that reflects the government’s firm stance against illicit content on OTT platforms. Kangana Ranaut, Actress and politician, while speaking to a news agency, has appreciated the government's move to ban OTT platforms such as Ullu, ALTT, and Desiflix for showing soft porn content.
Conclusion
The centre’s intervention sends a clear message that OTT platforms cannot remain exempt from accountability. The move is a response to the growing concern of harms caused by unregulated digital content and non-compliances by the platforms, particularly in relation to illicit material, and broader violations of decency laws in India. However, the enforcement must now go beyond issuing orders and require a robust measurable compliance framework for OTT platforms.
In today’s fast-paced era, when subscription-based content platforms place vast libraries at users' fingertips, the government's action is necessary and proportionate, marking a decisive step toward safer digital and healthy regulated environments.
References
- https://www.newsonair.gov.in/govt-bans-25-ott-websites-apps-over-vulgar-and-pornographic-content/
- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/technology/tech-news/big-shots-ullu-altt-desiflix-mojflix-and-20-other-ott-apps-banned-what-governments-ban-order-says/articleshow/122918803.cms
- https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/centre-bans-ott-platforms-ullu-altt-desiflix-for-obscene-content-8947100
- https://foxmandal.in/News/sc-takes-note-of-obscenity-plea-issues-notice-to-ott-platforms/
- https://www.morungexpress.com/kangana-ranaut-calls-banning-ott-platforms-for-soft-porn-content-a-much-appreciated-move
- https://www.livemint.com/news/india/do-something-supreme-court-to-centre-ott-platforms-on-obscene-content-pil-netflix-amazon-prime-ullu-altt-x-facebook-11745823594972.html
%20(1).webp)
Introduction
The global food industry is vast and complex, influencing consumer behaviour, policy, and health outcomes worldwide. However, misinformation within this sector is pervasive, with significant consequences for public health and market dynamics. Misinformation can arise from various sources, including misleading marketing campaigns, unsubstantiated health claims, and misrepresentation of food production practices through public endorsement or otherwise. Nutrition misinformation is one such example. The promotion of false or unproven products for profit can lead to mislead consumers and affect their interests. Misleading claims and inaccurate information about the nutritional value of food products and processes are common claims. The misinformation created about food on the global stage distorts public understanding of nutrition, food safety, and environmental impacts, leading to significant consequences for public health, consumer trust, and the economy.
Rise of Nutritional Misinformation and Consumer Distrust
Health and nutrition-related misinformation is one of the most prevalent types in the food sector. Businesses frequently advertise their products as "natural" or "healthy" without providing sufficient data to back up these claims, tricking customers into buying goods that might be heavy in fat, sugar, or salt. Words like "superfood" are frequently used without supporting evidence from science, giving the impression that they are healthier.
Misinformation also impacts the sustainability and ethics of food production. Claims of "sustainable" or "ethical" sourcing are frequently exaggerated or fabricated, leaving consumers unaware of the true environmental and social costs associated with certain products.
This lack of clarity is not only observed in general food trends but also within organisations meant to provide trustworthy information. There has been significant criticism, directed at the International Food Information Council (IFIC), for their alleged promotion of nutrition-based misinformation to safeguard the interests of large food corporations, resulting in potentially compromising public health. The preemptive claims that IFIC made about the nutritive claims have been questioned by the National Institutes of Health, USA in November 2022. They reported in their study that IFIC promotes food and beverage company interests and undermines the accurate dissemination of scientific evidence related to diet and health. This was in support of the objective of the study, which was to determine whether, there have been many claims that the nutritional value of certain foods or diets may be manipulated to favour business goals, leaving consumers misinformed about what constitutes a truly healthy diet.
Another source of misinformation is the growing ‘Free-From’ fad. The “free-from” label in the US is a food category of products that claim to be free from certain ingredients or chemicals. It has been steadily growing by 7% annually. These labels often tout products as healthier due to a simpler ingredient list. Although seemingly harmless, transparency in ingredient disclosure is often obscured in the 'free-from' trend. This can lead to consumer distrust in the long run, making them hesitant.
The Harmful Effects of Food Misinformation
The effects of misinformation about nutrition and food safety can directly affect public health.
Consumers unknowingly may accept false claims or avoid certain foods without scientific basis and adopt harmful dietary habits, potentially leading to malnutrition or other health problems. By the time the realisation sets in about being misled, their trust is eroded not only towards such companies but also towards the regulators. This distrust can lead to declining consumer confidence and disrupt market stability.
Some food-related misinformation downplays the environmental impact that certain food production practices have. An example of such a situation is the promotion of meat alternatives as being entirely eco-friendly without considering all environmental factors. This can mislead consumers and obscure the complex environmental effects of food production systems.
Misinformation can distort consumer purchasing habits, potentially leading to a reduced demand for certain products and unfair competition. The sufferers in this case are the small-scale producers who suffer disproportionately, while the large corporations might use this misinformation to maintain their dominance in the market. Regulatory checks, open communication, and public education campaigns are needed to combat mis/disinformation in the global food sector and enable consumers to make decisions that are sustainable, healthful and informed.
CyberPeace Recommendations
- Unfair trade practices like providing misleading information or unchecked claims on food products should be better addressed by the regulators. Companies must provide clear, transparent and accurate information about their products as mandated under the Food Safety and Standards (Advertising and Claims) Regulations, 2018. This information should include the true origins, production methods, and nutritional content on their labels.
- Promotions of initiatives and investments by public health organisations and food authorities towards educating consumers and improving food literacy should encouraged.
- Regulating social media endorsement is also crucial to prevent the spread of misinformation and unchecked claims. Without proper due diligence on product details, influencers may unknowingly mislead their audience, causing potential harm.
- The Social Media Platforms can partner with nutritionists, dietitians, and other health professionals who are content creators, as they can help in understanding and promoting accurate, science-based nutrition information and debunk any misleading claims.
- Campaigns should be encouraged to spread public awareness about the harms of food-related misleading claims or trends. Emphasis should be on evidence-based nutritional guidance. The ongoing research towards food safety, nutrition, and true information should be actively communicated to keep the public informed. Combating food misinformation requires more robust regulations, improved transparency, and heightened consumer awareness and vigilance.
References
- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/label-claims-on-packaged-food-could-be-misleading-icmr/articleshow/110053363.cms
- https://www.outlookindia.com/hub4business/empowering-change-freedom-food-alliance-takes-on-global-food-industry-misinformation
- https://insightsnow.com/misinformation-hurting-food-business/
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9618198/pdf/12992_2022_Article_884.pdf

Executive Summary:
A viral social media video falsely claims that Meta AI reads all WhatsApp group and individual chats by default, and that enabling “Advanced Chat Privacy” can stop this. On performing reverse image search we found a blog post of WhatsApp which was posted in the month of April 2025 which claims that all personal and group chats remain protected with end to end (E2E) encryption, accessible only to the sender and recipient. Meta AI can interact only with messages explicitly sent to it or tagged with @MetaAI. The “Advanced Chat Privacy” feature is designed to prevent external sharing of chats, not to restrict Meta AI access. Therefore, the viral claim is misleading and factually incorrect, aimed at creating unnecessary fear among users.
Claim:
A viral social media video [archived link] alleges that Meta AI is actively accessing private conversations on WhatsApp, including both group and individual chats, due to the current default settings. The video further claims that users can safeguard their privacy by enabling the “Advanced Chat Privacy” feature, which purportedly prevents such access.

Fact Check:
Upon doing reverse image search from the keyframe of the viral video, we found a WhatsApp blog post from April 2025 that explains new privacy features to help users control their chats and data. It states that Meta AI can only see messages directly sent to it or tagged with @Meta AI. All personal and group chats are secured with end-to-end encryption, so only the sender and receiver can read them. The "Advanced Chat Privacy" setting helps stop chats from being shared outside WhatsApp, like blocking exports or auto-downloads, but it doesn’t affect Meta AI since it’s already blocked from reading chats. This shows the viral claim is false and meant to confuse people.


Conclusion:
The claim that Meta AI is reading WhatsApp Group Chats and that enabling the "Advance Chat Privacy" setting can prevent this is false and misleading. WhatsApp has officially confirmed that Meta AI only accesses messages explicitly shared with it, and all chats remain protected by end-to-end encryption, ensuring privacy. The "Advanced Chat Privacy" setting does not relate to Meta AI access, as it is already restricted by default.
- Claim: Viral social media video claims that WhatsApp Group Chats are being read by Meta AI due to current settings, and enabling the "Advance Chat Privacy" setting can prevent this.
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading