#FactCheck - Viral Video of Salman Khan and Govinda Falsely Linked to Mithun Chakraborty’s Death

Introduction

Conversations surrounding the scourge of misinformation online typically focus on the risks to social order, political stability, economic safety and personal security. An oft-overlooked aspect of this phenomenon is the fact that it also takes a very real emotional and mental toll on people. Even as we grapple with the big picture questions about financial fraud or political rumors or inaccurate medical information online, we must also appreciate the fact that being exposed to misinformation and becoming aware of one’s own vulnerability are both significant sources of mental stress in today’s digital ecosystem.

Inaccurate information causes confusion and worry, which has negative consequences for mental health. Misinformation may also impair people's sense of well-being by undermining their trust in institutions, authority figures, and their own judgment. The constant bombardment of misinformation can lead to information overload, wherein people are unable to discriminate between legitimate sources and misleading content, resulting in mental exhaustion and a sense of being overwhelmed by the sheer volume of information available. Vulnerable groups such as children, the elderly, and those with pre-existing health conditions are more sensitive or susceptible to the negative effects of misinformation.

How Does Misinformation Endanger Mental Health?

Misinformation on social media platforms is a matter of public health because it has the potential to confuse people, lead to poor decision-making and result in cognitive dissonance, anxiety and unwanted behavioural changes.

Unconstrained misinformation can also lead to social disorder and the prevalence of negative emotions amongst larger numbers, ultimately causing a huge impact on society. Therefore, understanding the spread and diffusion characteristics of misinformation on Internet platforms is crucial.

The spread of misinformation can elicit different emotions of the public, and the emotions also change with the spread of misinformation. Factors such as user engagement, number of comments, and time of discussion all have an impact on the change of emotions in misinformation. Active users tend to make more comments, engage longer in discussions, and display more dominant negative emotions when triggered by misinformation. Understanding the evolution pattern of emotions triggered by misinformation is also important in view of the public’s emotional fluctuations under the influence of misinformation, and social media often magnifies the impact of emotions and makes emotions spread rapidly in social networks. For example, the sentiment of misinformation increases when there are sensitive topics such as political elections, viral trending topics, health-related information, communal and local information, information about natural disasters and more. Active misinformation on the Internet not only affects the public's psychology, mental health and behavior, but also has an impact on the stability of social order and the maintenance of social security.

Prebunking and Debunking To Build Mental Guards Against Misinformation

As the spread of misinformation and disinformation rises, so do the techniques aimed to tackle their spread. Prebunking or attitudinal inoculation is a technique for training individuals to recogniseand resist deceptive communications before they can take root. Prebunking is a psychological method for mitigating the effects of misinformation, strengthening resilience and creating cognitive defenses against future misinformation. Debunking provides individuals with accurate information to counter false claims and myths, correcting misconceptions and preventing the spread of misinformation. By presenting evidence-based refutations, debunking helps individuals distinguish fact from fiction.

What do health experts say about online misinformation?

“In the21st century, mental health is crucial due to the overwhelming amount of information available online. The COVID-19 pandemic-related misinformation was a prime example of this, with misinformation spreading online, leading to increased anxiety, panic buying, fear of leaving home, and mistrust in health measures. To protect our mental health, it is essential to cultivate a discerning mindset, question sources, and verify information before consumption. Fostering a supportive community that encourages open dialogue and fact-checking can help navigate the digital information landscape with confidence and emotional support. Prioritising self-care routines, mindfulness practices, and seeking professional guidance are also crucial for safeguarding mental health in the digital information era.”

In conversation with CyberPeace ~ Says Dubai-based psychologist, Aishwarya Menon, (BA,in Psychology and Criminology from the University of Westen Ontario, London and MA in Mental Health and Addictions (Humber College, University of Guelph),Toronto.

CyberPeace Policy Recommendations:

1)     Countering misinformation is everyone's shared responsibility. To mitigate the negative effects of infodemics online, we must look at developing strong legal policies, creating and promoting awareness campaigns, relying on authenticated content on mass media, and increasing people's digital literacy.

2)     Expert organisations actively verifying the information through various strategies including prebunking and debunking efforts are among those best placed to refute misinformation and direct users to evidence-based information sources. It is recommended that countermeasures for users on platforms be increased with evidence-based data or accurate information.

3)     The role of social media platforms is crucial in the misinformation crisis, hence it is recommended that social media platforms actively counter the production of misinformation on their platforms. Local, national, and international efforts and additional research are required to implement the robust misinformation counterstrategies.

4)     Netizens are advised or encouraged to follow official sources to check the reliability of any news or information. They must recognise the red flags by recognising the signs such as questionable facts, poorly written texts, surprising or upsetting news, fake social media accounts and fake websites designed to look like legitimate ones. Netizens are also encouraged to develop cognitive skills to discern fact and reality. Netizens are advised to approach information with a healthy dose of skepticism and curiosity.

Final Words:

It is crucial to protect mental health by escalating and disturbing the rise of misinformation incidents on various subjects, safeguarding our minds requires cognitive skills, building media literacy and verifying the information from trusted sources, prioritising mental health by self-care practices and staying connected with supportive authenticated networks. Promoting prebunking and debunking initiatives is necessary. Netizen scan protect themselves against the negative effects of misinformation and cultivate a resilient mindset in the digital information age.

References:

1. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/scn/2021/7999760/
2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8502082/

‍

In recent months, conversations around the possible shortage of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), a basic cooking fuel in Indian households, have quietly resurfaced across the country. From whispers in local markets to viral messages circulating on social media, concerns about LPG availability began to take hold in the public imagination. Though the immediacy of the situation has since faded, its echoes remain, reminding us how quickly uncertainty can spread. Like a ripple across still water, a single rumour can travel far, gathering force as it moves and blurring the line between perception and reality. 

Against this backdrop, in April 2026, reports began circulating about a potential LPG shortage. The Union Government moved quickly to counter what it identified as misinformation, emphasising that supply remained stable and urging citizens not to engage in panic buying.  A noticeable disconnect emerged between official communication and public perception. Across different regions, signs of anxiety-driven behaviour became evident. Instances of panic buying and hoarding increased, law enforcement agencies conducted raids to address such actions, and opportunistic thefts were reported, often exploiting widespread concern. These incidents highlight how misinformation, even when addressed promptly, can continue to shape public behaviour. 

It is worth noting that rising prices also played a role in shaping public response, as increases in LPG rates contributed to a sense of urgency among consumers. Therefore, the surge in panic buying cannot be attributed solely to misinformation, but rather to a combination of economic pressures and perceived scarcity.

‍

Misinformation Ecosystem - From Rumours to Behaviour
‍

The spread of misinformation is occurring at an unprecedented pace and is, in large part, driven by the viral nature of social media. Digital platforms not only enable the rapid dissemination of information but also allow it to be amplified in ways that would not be possible through traditional media outlets. Often, the drive for virality outweighs any concern for accuracy, meaning that many individuals who spread misinformation are motivated more by the pursuit of attention than by any ideological agenda. Recent arrests of individuals involved in spreading misinformation about LPG and petrol shortages, much of which went viral, suggest that misinformation today is frequently driven by the desire for visibility rather than ideological motives. The information being circulated has largely followed a similar pattern, focusing on fears of an LPG shortage, expectations of price increases, and concerns about supply disruptions. Even though this information has not been verified, it has triggered behavioural responses among individuals. In several areas, including parts of Uttar Pradesh and Goa, the spread of misinformation through social media has led to panic buying, despite official assurances that there would be sufficient LPG supply to meet demand. 

‍

The impact of panic buying, and its associated misinformation, has already been seen in multiple sectors; these increased demands have placed pressure on the distribution network, leading to disruptions in access, as well as being out of stock of certain products. In many cases, commercial users of products (especially restaurants) have experienced significant disruption, threatening their continued operations, and industry representatives have alerted others about the inconsistent supply of commercial cylinders; likewise, consumers (households) are beginning to switch to alternative products (e.g., induction cooking) as a reflection of the anticipatory mindset to address the uncertainty created through perceptions of Product Scarcity.
‍

‍

State Response: Managing Misinformation or Behaviour?
‍

‍

The government has taken a variety of approaches, from advisories and enforcement actions to communicating with citizens indirectly. For example, State Governments have been directed to combat misinformation, monitor supply chains and take action against hoarding and black market activity. There has been a significant increase in the level of large- scale enforcement activity, with over 3,700 raids carried out to crack down on hoarding and black marketing related to LPG, in addition to confiscating cylinders and issuing penalties to those who break the law. In addition, the authorities have also focused on maintaining regular communication with the public in order to reassure them about the supply of LPG and fuel stability.

‍

Geopolitical Context: Why Rumours Are Believable
‍

Understanding today’s panic requires an understanding of the global environment: i.e., due to the ongoing conflict in West Asia, the energy markets are unstable, and energy supply is uncertain not only in West Asia but across a large part of the world. Even if domestic supply remains stable, public perception is affected by global instability. A clear example of this can be seen in neighbouring countries to India; Pakistan has seen significant increases in the cost of fuel, implemented measures such as reducing the number of days individuals work each week, and has created public support mechanisms; Bangladesh has imposed restrictions on the use of energy, has shortened the number of hours individuals can operate businesses each day, and has restricted the total amount of energy used; Sri Lanka has begun to ration fuel, and to increase the price of petrol; and Nepal has reduced the numbers of days individuals may work each week, and has adjusted supply.

‍

All of these examples are not isolated instances, but are markers of a common regional environment. As we live in a global community that is connected in many ways, these developments will quickly affect public expectations everywhere. Therefore, for consumers in India, seeing evidence of rationing of fuel and shortages of fuel in neighbouring countries increases their belief that these types of problems could occur in their country.

‍

Critical Perspective: Between Panic and Precaution
‍

The LPG incident has brought about questions surrounding the nature of misinformation in terms of its definition & regulation. One of the main concerns is whether or not "misinformation" is being cast too widely. To be sure, false claims need to be addressed; however, not everything that is responded to publicly is based on untrue facts, as many times public responses are based on perceived risk via global and/or local incidents that occur. Perhaps the greatest challenge is the difficulty in differentiating precaution and panic. People’s memories of the COVID-19 pandemic are fresh in their minds and will serve to influence their behaviours moving onward, in that many people are stockpiling or preparing for uncertainty not out of irrational fear, but as an anticipatory response to their prior experiences.

‍

Conclusion
‍

The Indian LPG "crisis" is not so much a problem with actual supply chain breakdown as it is a result of how information and behaviour are connected through perception. This cohabitating environment of panic buying, law enforcement, and government assurance demonstrates an evident disconnect and gap between how governments present a narrative and how the public responds. While there is some role of misinformation within this discourse, the misinformation itself extends beyond any or all false claims about LPG supply and operates within a greater ecosystem of global uncertainty and personal experience.  As such, and because of this, perception becomes an incredibly strong force in itself that produces true economic consequences.

‍

Reference
‍

1. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2248640&utm_source&reg=3&lang=2 
2. https://www.pmindia.gov.in/en/news_updates/pm-addresses-the-lok-sabha-on-the-ongoing-conflict-in-west-asia/ 
3. https://www.ndtv.com/delhi-news/iran-war-middle-east-conflict-why-the-lpg-crisis-is-forcing-migrants-to-quietly-leave-delhi-11313629 
4. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/bareilly/thieves-steal-108-lpg-cylinders-from-godown-in-up/articleshow/130035518.cms 
5. https://indianexpress.com/article/india/arrested-rumours-lpg-petrol-shortage-police-chasing-views-10614193/ 
6. https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/lucknow-news/social-media-rumours-fuel-panic-buying-in-some-up-districts-situation-normal-in-lucknow-101774465353107.html 
7. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/goa/fear-of-shortage-price-rise-fuels-panic-buying-across-goa/articleshow/129810144.cms 
8. https://www.news18.com/cities/new-delhi-news/online-rumours-offline-rush-panic-buying-sweeps-petrol-pumps-across-cities-whats-the-truth-ws-ln-9995684.html 
9. https://m.economictimes.com/news/india/3700-raids-conducted-across-country-to-wipe-out-lpg-black-marketing-says-centre/articleshow/130025232.cms 
10. https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/induction-stoves-fly-off-shelves-india-gas-shortage-fears-spark-panic-buying-2026-03-12/ 
11. https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/restaurant-body-warns-of-closures-over-commercial-lpg-supply-concerns-writes-to-minister-11194418 
12. https://www.freepressjournal.in/mumbai/fpj-dialogue-we-are-getting-only-1-cylinder-instead-of-10-says-ahar-president-vijay-shetty-on-mumbai-lpg-crisis 
13. https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/fuel-cuts-wfh-and-more-how-indias-neighbours-are-dealing-with-global-energy-crisis-triggered-by-us-iran-war-101775397199941.html 
14. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-03-30/four-step-fuel-supply-plan-national-cabinet-fuel-crisis/106512706 ‍
15. https://tribune.net.ph/2026/04/07/philippines-scrambles-as-regional-oil-crisis-hits

Introduction

‍

Law grows by confronting its absences, it heals through its own gaps. States often find themselves navigating a shared frontier without a mutual guide or lines of law in an era of expanding digital boundaries and growing cyber damages. The United Nations General Assembly ratified the United Nations Convention against Cybercrime on December 24, 2024, and more than sixty governments were in attendance in the signing ceremony on 24th & 25th October this year, marking a moment of institutional regeneration and global commitment. 

‍

A new Lexicon for Global Order

The old liberal order is being strained by growing nationalism, economic fracturing, populism, and great-power competition as often emphasised in the works of scholars like G. John Iken berry and John Mearsheimer. Multilateral arrangements become more brittle in such circumstances. Therefore, the new cybercrimes convention represents not only a legal tool but also a resurgence of international promise, a significant win for collective governance in an uncertain time. It serves as a reminder that institutions can be rebuilt even after they have been damaged. 

‍

In Discussion: The Fabric of the Digital Polis

‍

The digital sphere has become a contentious area. On the one hand, the US and its allies support stakeholder governance, robust individual rights, and open data flows. On the other hand, nations like China and Russia describe a “post-liberal cyber order” based on state mediation, heavily regulated flows, and sovereignty. Instead of focusing on ideological dichotomies, India, which is positioned as both a rising power and a voice of the Global South, has offered a viewpoint based on supply-chain security, data localisation, and capacity creation. Thus, rather than being merely a regulation, the treaty arises from a framework of strategic recalibration. 

‍

What Changed & Why it Matters

‍

There have been regional cybercrime accords up to this point, such as the Budapest Convention. The goal of this new international convention, which is accessible to all UN members, is to standardise definitions, evidence sharing and investigation instruments. 72 states signed the Hanoi signature event in October, 2025, demonstrating an unparalleled level of scope and determination. In addition to establishing structures for cooperative investigations, extradition, and the sharing of electronic evidence, it requires signatories to criminalise acts such as fraud, unlawful access to systems, data interference, and online child exploitation. 

For the first time, a legally obligatory global architecture aims to harmonise cross-border evidence flows, mutual legal assistance, and national procedural laws. Cybercrime offers genuine promise for community defence at a time when it is no longer incidental but existential, attacks on hospitals, schools and infrastructure are now common, according to the Global Observatory.

‍

Holding the Line: India’s Deliberate Path in the Age of Cyber Multilateralism 

‍

India takes a contemplative rather than a reluctant stance towards the UN Cybercrime Treaty. Though it played an active role during the drafting sessions and lent its voice to the shaping of global cyber norms, New Delhi is yet to sign the convention. Subtle but intentional, the reluctance suggests a more comprehensive reflection, an evaluation of how international obligations correspond with domestic constitutional protections, especially the right to privacy upheld by the Supreme Court in Puttaswamy v. UOI (2017). 

Prudence is the reason for this halt. Policy circles speculate that the government is still assessing the treaty’s consequences for national data protection, surveillance regimes, and territorial sovereignty. Officials have not provided explicit justifications for India’s refusal to join. India’s position has frequently been characterised by striking a careful balance between digital sovereignty and taking part in cooperative international regimes. In earlier negotiations, India had even proposed including clauses to penalise “offensive messages” on social media, echoing the erstwhile Section 66A of the IT Act, 2000, but the suggestion found little international traction. 

Advocates for digital rights such as Raman Jit Singh Chima of Access Now have warned that ensuring that the treaty’s implementation upholds constitutional privacy principles may be necessary for India to eventually endorse it. He contends that the treaty’s wording might not entirely meet India’s legal requirements in the absence of such voluntary pledges. 

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres praised the agreement as “a powerful, legally binding instrument to strengthen our collective defences against “cybercrime” during its signing in Hanoi. The issue for India is to make sure that multilateral collaboration develops in accordance with constitutional values rather than to reject that vision. Therefore, the path forward is one of assertion rather than absence, careful march towards a cyber future that protects freedom and sovereignty. 

‍

Sources: 

• https://www.icwa.in/show_content.php?lang=1&level=3&ls_id=12244&lid=7470 
• https://www.medianama.com/2025/10/223-72-nations-un-first-cybercrime-treaty-india-abstains-privacy/ ‍
• https://therecord.media/us-declines-signing-cybercrime-treaty