#FactCheck - Viral Video Misrepresented as Reaction to Pakistan’s Defeat in T20 World Cup
Executive Summary
A video is being widely shared on social media with the claim that Baloch people celebrated by dancing after Pakistan’s crushing defeat to India in the T20 World Cup. However, research by the CyberPeace found the claim to be misleading. The video is actually from a Lohri celebration held on January 23 at Government College University in Lahore, and is unrelated to any cricket match. India defeated Pakistan by 61 runs in the T20 World Cup 2026 match held in Colombo last Sunday. India scored 175 runs for the loss of seven wickets in 20 overs, while Pakistan were bowled out for 114 runs in 18 overs.
Claim
The 30-second video was shared on X with the caption, “Baloch people celebrate India’s victory.” The footage shows a group of men dressed in traditional attire dancing around a fire, while a large crowd gathers around and applauds.

Fact Check
To verify the authenticity of the viral claim, key frames from the video were extracted and subjected to reverse image search. The search led to an Instagram post uploaded on January 26, 2026, by an account associated with Government College University Lahore. The caption described the performance as a Balochistan cultural dance held at the university’s amphitheatre.

Further research also uncovered another video of the same event, recorded from a different angle and uploaded on January 24, 2026, on Instagram. The caption again confirmed that the event took place at Government College University Lahore.

Conclusion
The evidence confirms that the viral video does not show Baloch people celebrating Pakistan’s defeat in the T20 World Cup. Instead, it depicts a cultural dance performance during a Lohri celebration at Government College University Lahore, and has been shared with a misleading claim.
Related Blogs

Introduction
In this age, when our data stands as the key to all resources, espionage has moved from dark alleys and trench coats to keyboards and code. In this era of active digital espionage, where intelligence is stolen through invisible cyberattacks that target computer networks. Cyber espionage and spying have become the most critical threat in the hyper-connected world of today. As governments, corporations, and individuals store an immense amount of confidential information online, the grounds of espionage have shifted from land and sea to the silent realm of cyberspace.
What is Cyber Espionage?
Cyber espionage refers to the unauthorised access of confidential data for strategic, political, military, and financial gain, unlike cybercrime, which is mostly about money. Cyber espionage is about gaining information power. The very first documented case dates back to 1986-87, when a group of German hackers breached the US military establishment and the defence systems and sold that stolen data to the Soviets and the KGB. This was the beginning of a new era where classified intelligence could be gathered even without entering a building.
Cyber espionage is mostly carried out by trained espionage professionals, elite hackers, and corporate spies whose sole purpose is to target the government, research organisations, military establishments, and other critical infrastructures.
The Objective
The act of Cyber Espionage is being driven by three major objectives, such as;
- Stealing of Intellectual Property- Starting from information and data related to military establishments to pharmaceutical patents, stealing innovation is cheaper than funding R&D.
- Political and Diplomatic Advantage- As government networks are hacked to access state secrets, negotiation strategies, and classified communications.
- Military Intelligence- Cyber spies also work to steal data on weapons troop movements, defence systems, and war systems, often years before conflict breaks out.
In a world being shaped by digital power, information is not just about knowledge. Rather, it is all about ensuring dominance.
The arsenal of modern digital spies is more sophisticated, and most importantly, they are used covertly rather than the spy gadgets that are shown in spy movies. Some of the tactics resorted to by the cyber spies can be recognised as;
- Phishing Attacks through fake emails that lure victims to click on malicious links or sharing of passwords.
- Persisting Advanced Threats through long-term stealth attacks in a network for more than a month or a year.
- Malware and Spyware are invisible software that logs keystrokes, records screens, or steals files silently.
- Deepfake Manipulations by creating AI-generated fake videos that can influence political developments in the country.
Anything that makes cyber espionage terrifying is not just the theft, but the fact that it goes undetected.
What Differentiates Cyber Espionage and Cyber Warfare
Cyber espionage is a silent and stealthy tactic that is carried out with utmost secrecy, being a long-term effort for intelligence gathering. It mostly focuses on the stealing of data, whereas Cyber warfare is an open and destructive tactic that is used to create an immediate and visible impact to create disruption. However, espionage is an act that prepares the battlefield for the warfare of the future.
Taking instances of real instances of cyber espionage, we can refer to examples such as;
- Operation Aurora was conducted in 2010, where Chinese Hackers based in Beijing tried to steal IP data from Google and American tech giants.
- The Stuxnet attack in 2010 was another cyber weapon that was developed to sabotage Iran’s nuclear centrifuges.
- SolarWinds Attack of 2020 was an instance of cyber espionage where a supply chain hack was carried out to target multiple US federal government agencies.
As most of these instances reflect that they were battles without guns, but with the use of codes. Several sources raise the question of whether cyber-attacks can be stopped. The answer lies in the fact that they cannot be stopped completely, but can be minimised to some extent, by developing capabilities to counter and deter cyber-attacks with the help of equal cyber defence capabilities.
Conclusion
From the Cold War era to the present Code War, espionage has evolved with technology. An effort that was once taken solely by spies and human assets, with the passing of time enhancement of technologies it is now expanded to malware, phishing, social engineering, and remote digital inflation. In this age of information warfare, espionage is faster, cheaper, and harder to trace than ever before. The enemies of a nation may never cross its borders, but they may already be inside its systems. However, the world has now officially entered a new battlefield, without boundaries, uniforms, and bombs. It is now being fought through bytes, breaches, and invisible enemies.
References
- https://www.sentinelone.com/cybersecurity-101/threat-intelligence/cyber-espionage/
- https://www.espiamos.com/en/content/espionage-in-the-digital-world-threats-and-opportunities.html
- https://www.apu.apus.edu/area-of-study/information-technology/resources/what-is-cyber-warfare/
- https://pride-security.co.uk/the-rise-of-digital-warfare-understanding-the-evolution-of-cyber-espionage/

Brief Overview of the EU AI Act
The EU AI Act, Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, was officially published in the EU Official Journal on 12 July 2024. This landmark legislation on Artificial Intelligence (AI) will come into force just 20 days after publication, setting harmonized rules across the EU. It amends key regulations and directives to ensure a robust framework for AI technologies. The AI Act, a set of EU rules governing AI, has been in development for two years and now, the EU AI Act enters into force across all 27 EU Member States on 1 August 2024, with certain future deadlines tied up and the enforcement of the majority of its provisions will commence on 2 August 2026. The law prohibits certain uses of AI tools, including those that threaten citizens' rights, such as biometric categorization, untargeted scraping of faces, and systems that try to read emotions are banned in the workplace and schools, as are social scoring systems. It also prohibits the use of predictive policing tools in some instances. The law takes a phased approach to implementing the EU's AI rulebook, meaning there are various deadlines between now and then as different legal provisions will start to apply.
The framework puts different obligations on AI developers, depending on use cases and perceived risk. The bulk of AI uses will not be regulated as they are considered low-risk, but a small number of potential AI use cases are banned under the law. High-risk use cases, such as biometric uses of AI or AI used in law enforcement, employment, education, and critical infrastructure, are allowed under the law but developers of such apps face obligations in areas like data quality and anti-bias considerations. A third risk tier also applies some lighter transparency requirements for makers of tools like AI chatbots.
In case of failure to comply with the Act, the companies in the EU providing, distributing, importing, and using AI systems and GPAI models, are subject to fines of up to EUR 35 million or seven per cent of the total worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher.
Key highlights of EU AI Act Provisions
- The AI Act classifies AI according to its risk. It prohibits Unacceptable risks such as social scoring systems and manipulative AI. The regulation mostly addresses high-risk AI systems.
- Limited-risk AI systems are subject to lighter transparency obligations and according to the act, the developers and deployers must ensure that the end-users are aware that the interaction they are having is with AI such as Chatbots and Deepfakes. The AI Act allows the free use of minimal-risk AI. This includes the majority of AI applications currently available in the EU single market like AI-enabled video games, and spam filters, but with the advancement of Gen AI changes with regards to this might be done. The majority of obligations fall on providers (developers) of high-risk AI systems that intend to place on the market or put into service high-risk AI systems in the EU, regardless of whether they are based in the EU or a third country. And also, a third-country provider where the high-risk AI system’s output is used in the EU.
- Users are natural or legal persons who deploy an AI system in a professional capacity, not affected end-users. Users (deployers) of high-risk AI systems have some obligations, though less than providers (developers). This applies to users located in the EU, and third-country users where the AI system’s output is used in the EU.
- General purpose AI or GPAI model providers must provide technical documentation, and instructions for use, comply with the Copyright Directive, and publish a summary of the content used for training. Free and open license GPAI model providers only need to comply with copyright and publish the training data summary, unless they present a systemic risk. All providers of GPAI models that present a systemic risk – open or closed – must also conduct model evaluations, and adversarial testing, and track and report serious incidents and ensure cybersecurity protections.
- The Codes of Practice will account for international approaches. It will cover but not necessarily be limited to the obligations, particularly the relevant information to include in technical documentation for authorities and downstream providers, identification of the type and nature of systemic risks and their sources, and the modalities of risk management accounting for specific challenges in addressing risks due to the way they may emerge and materialize throughout the value chain. The AI Office may invite GPAI model providers, and relevant national competent authorities to participate in drawing up the codes, while civil society, industry, academia, downstream providers and independent experts may support the process.
Application & Timeline of Act
The EU AI Act will be fully applicable 24 months after entry into force, but some parts will be applicable sooner, for instance the ban on AI systems posing unacceptable risks will apply six months after the entry into force. The Codes of Practice will apply nine months after entry into force. Rules on general-purpose AI systems that need to comply with transparency requirements will apply 12 months after the entry into force. High-risk systems will have more time to comply with the requirements as the obligations concerning them will become applicable 36 months after the entry into force. The expected timeline for the same is:
- August 1st, 2024: The AI Act will enter into force.
- February 2025: Prohibition of certain AI systems - Chapters I (general provisions) & II (prohibited AI systems) will apply; Prohibition of certain AI systems.
- August 2025: Chapter III Section 4 (notifying authorities), Chapter V (general purpose AI models), Chapter VII (governance), Chapter XII (confidentiality and penalties), and Article 78 (confidentiality) will apply, except for Article 101 (fines for General Purpose AI providers); Requirements for new GPAI models.
- August 2026: The whole AI Act applies, except for Article 6(1) & corresponding obligations (one of the categories of high-risk AI systems);
- August 2027: Article 6(1) & corresponding obligations apply.
The AI Act sets out clear definitions for the different actors involved in AI, such as the providers, deployers, importers, distributors, and product manufacturers. This means all parties involved in the development, usage, import, distribution, or manufacturing of AI systems will be held accountable. Along with this, the AI Act also applies to providers and deployers of AI systems located outside of the EU, e.g., in Switzerland, if output produced by the system is intended to be used in the EU. The Act applies to any AI system within the EU that is on the market, in service, or in use, covering both AI providers (the companies selling AI systems) and AI deployers (the organizations using those systems).
In short, the AI Act will apply to different companies across the AI distribution chain, including providers, deployers, importers, and distributors (collectively referred to as “Operators”). The EU AI Act also has extraterritorial application and can also apply to companies not established in the EU, or providers outside the EU if they -make an AI system or GPAI model available on the EU market. Even if only the output generated by the AI system is used in the EU, the Act still applies to such providers and deployers.
CyberPeace Outlook
The EU AI Act, approved by EU lawmakers in 2024, is a landmark legislation designed to protect citizens' health, safety, and fundamental rights from potential harm caused by AI systems. The AI Act will apply to AI systems and GPAI models. The Act creates a tiered risk categorization system with various regulations and stiff penalties for noncompliance. The Act adopts a risk-based approach to AI governance, categorizing potential risks into four tiers: unacceptable, high, limited, and low. Violations of banned systems carry the highest fine: €35 million, or 7 percent of global annual revenue. It establishes transparency requirements for general-purpose AI systems. The regulation also provides specific rules for general-purpose AI (GPAI) models and lays down more stringent requirements for GPAI models with 'high-impact capabilities' that could pose a systemic risk and have a significant impact on the internal market. For high-risk AI systems, the AI Act addresses the issues of fundamental rights impact assessment and data protection impact assessment.
The EU AI Act aims to enhance trust in AI technologies by establishing clear regulatory standards governing AI. We encourage regulatory frameworks that strive to balance the desire to foster innovation with the critical need to prevent unethical practices that may cause user harm. The legislation can be seen as strengthening the EU's position as a global leader in AI innovation and developing regulatory frameworks for emerging technologies. It sets a global benchmark for regulating AI. The companies to which the act applies will need to make sure their practices align with the same. The act may inspire other nations to develop their own legislation contributing to global AI governance. The world of AI is complex and challenging, the implementation of regulatory checks, and compliance by the concerned companies, all pose a conundrum. However, in the end, balancing innovation with ethical considerations is paramount.
At the same hand, the tech sector welcomes regulatory progress but warns that overly-rigid regulations could stifle innovation. Hence flexibility and adaptability are key to effective AI governance. The journey towards robust AI regulation has begun in major countries, and it is important that we find the right balance between safety and innovation and also take into consideration the industry reactions.
References:
- https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L_202401689
- https://www.theverge.com/2024/7/12/24197058/eu-ai-act-regulations-bans-deadline
- https://techcrunch.com/2024/07/12/eus-ai-act-gets-published-in-blocs-official-journal-starting-clock-on-legal-deadlines/
- https://www.wsgr.com/en/insights/eu-ai-act-to-enter-into-force-in-august.html
- https://www.techtarget.com/searchenterpriseai/tip/Is-your-business-ready-for-the-EU-AI-Act
- https://www.simmons-simmons.com/en/publications/clyimpowh000ouxgkw1oidakk/the-eu-ai-act-a-quick-guide

Introduction
The spread of information in the quickly changing digital age presents both advantages and difficulties. The phrases "misinformation" and "disinformation" are commonly used in conversations concerning information inaccuracy. It's important to counter such prevalent threats, especially in light of how they affect countries like India. It becomes essential to investigate the practical ramifications of misinformation/disinformation and other prevalent digital threats. Like many other nations, India has had to deal with the fallout from fraudulent internet actions in 2023, which has highlighted the critical necessity for strong cybersecurity safeguards.
The Emergence of AI Chatbots; OpenAI's ChatGPT and Google's Bard
The launch of OpenAI's ChatGPT in November 2022 was a major turning point in the AI space, inspiring the creation of rival chatbot ‘Google's Bard’ (Launched in 2023). These chatbots represent a significant breakthrough in artificial intelligence (AI) as they produce replies by combining information gathered from huge databases, driven by Large Language Models (LLMs). In the same way, AI picture generators that make use of diffusion models and existing datasets have attracted a lot of interest in 2023.
Deepfake Proliferation in 2023
Deepfake technology's proliferation in 2023 contributed to misinformation/disinformation in India, affecting politicians, corporate leaders, and celebrities. Some of these fakes were used for political purposes while others were for creating pornographic and entertainment content. Social turmoil, political instability, and financial ramifications were among the outcomes. The lack of tech measures about the same added difficulties in detection & prevention, causing widespread synthetic content.
Challenges of Synthetic Media
Problems of synthetic media, especially AI-powered or synthetic Audio video content proliferated widely during 2023 in India. These included issues with political manipulation, identity theft, disinformation, legal and ethical issues, security risks, difficulties with identification, and issues with media integrity. It covered an array of consequences, ranging from financial deception and the dissemination of false information to swaying elections and intensifying intercultural conflicts.
Biometric Fraud Surge in 2023
Biometric fraud in India, especially through the Aadhaar-enabled Payment System (AePS), has become a major threat in 2023. Due to the AePS's weaknesses being exploited by cybercriminals, many depositors have had their hard-earned assets stolen by fraudulent activity. This demonstrates the real effects of biometric fraud on those who have had their Aadhaar-linked data manipulated and unauthorized access granted. The use of biometric data in financial systems raises more questions about the security and integrity of the nation's digital payment systems in addition to endangering individual financial stability.
Government strategies to counter digital threats
- The Indian Union Government has sent a warning to the country's largest social media platforms, highlighting the importance of exercising caution when spotting and responding to deepfake and false material. The advice directs intermediaries to delete reported information within 36 hours, disable access in compliance with IT Rules 2021, and act quickly against content that violates laws and regulations. The government's dedication to ensuring the safety of digital citizens was underscored by Union Minister Rajeev Chandrasekhar, who also stressed the gravity of deepfake crimes, which disproportionately impact women.
- The government has recently come up with an advisory to social media intermediaries to identify misinformation and deepfakes and to make sure of the compliance of Information Technology (IT) Rules 2021. It is the legal obligation of online platforms to prevent the spread of misinformation and exercise due diligence or reasonable efforts to identify misinformation and deepfakes.
- The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules 2021 were amended in 2023. The online gaming industry is required to abide by a set of rules. These include not hosting harmful or unverified online games, not promoting games without approval from the SRB, labelling real-money games with a verification mark, educating users about deposit and winning policies, setting up a quick and effective grievance redressal process, requesting user information, and forbidding the offering of credit or financing for real-money gaming. These steps are intended to guarantee ethical and open behaviour throughout the online gaming industry.
- With an emphasis on Personal Data Protection, the government enacted the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023. It is a brand-new framework for digital personal data protection which aims to protect the individual's digital personal data.
- The " Cyber Swachhta Kendra " (Botnet Cleaning and Malware Analysis Centre) is a part of the Government of India's Digital India initiative under the (MeitY) to create a secure cyberspace. It uses malware research and botnet identification to tackle cybersecurity. It works with antivirus software providers and internet service providers to establish a safer digital environment.
Strategies by Social Media Platforms
Various social media platforms like YouTube, and Meta have reformed their policies on misinformation and disinformation. This shows their comprehensive strategy for combating deepfake, misinformation/disinformation content on the network. The platform YouTube prioritizes eliminating content that transgresses its regulations, decreasing the amount of questionable information that is recommended, endorsing reliable news sources, and assisting reputable authors. YouTube uses unambiguous facts and expert consensus to thwart misrepresentation. In order to quickly delete information that violates policies, a mix of content reviewers and machine learning is used throughout the enforcement process. Policies are designed in partnership with external experts and producers. In order to improve the overall quality of information that users have access to, the platform also gives users the ability to flag material, places a strong emphasis on media literacy, and gives precedence to giving context.
Meta’s policies address different misinformation categories, aiming for a balance between expression, safety, and authenticity. Content directly contributing to imminent harm or political interference is removed, with partnerships with experts for assessment. To counter misinformation, the efforts include fact-checking partnerships, directing users to authoritative sources, and promoting media literacy.
Promoting ‘Tech for Good’
By 2024, the vision for "Tech for Good" will have expanded to include programs that enable people to understand the ever-complex digital world and promote a more secure and reliable online community. The emphasis is on using technology to strengthen cybersecurity defenses and combat dishonest practices. This entails encouraging digital literacy and providing users with the knowledge and skills to recognize and stop false information, online dangers, and cybercrimes. Furthermore, the focus is on promoting and exposing effective strategies for preventing cybercrime through cooperation between citizens, government agencies, and technology businesses. The intention is to employ technology's good aspects to build a digital environment that values security, honesty, and moral behaviour while also promoting innovation and connectedness.
Conclusion
In the evolving digital landscape, difficulties are presented by false information powered by artificial intelligence and the misuse of advanced technology by bad actors. Notably, there are ongoing collaborative efforts and progress in creating a secure digital environment. Governments, social media corporations, civil societies and tech companies have shown a united commitment to tackling the intricacies of the digital world in 2024 through their own projects. It is evident that everyone has a shared obligation to establish a safe online environment with the adoption of ethical norms, protective laws, and cybersecurity measures. The "Tech for Good" goal for 2024, which emphasizes digital literacy, collaboration, and the ethical use of technology, seems promising. The cooperative efforts of people, governments, civil societies and tech firms will play a crucial role as we continue to improve our policies, practices, and technical solutions.
References:
- https://news.abplive.com/fact-check/deepfakes-ai-driven-misinformation-year-2023-brought-new-era-of-digital-deception-abpp-1651243
- https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1975445