#FactCheck -AI-Generated Video Falsely Shared as Leopard Dragging Passenger From Moving Train

Introduction

Digitalisation presents both opportunities and challenges for micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs) in emerging markets. Digital tools can increase business efficiency and reach but also increase exposure to misinformation, fraud, and cyber attacks. Such cyber threats can lead to financial losses, reputational damage, loss of customer trust, and other challenges hindering MSMEs' ability and desire to participate in the digital economy.

The current information dump is a major component of misinformation. Misinformation spreads or emerges from online sources, causing controversy and confusion in various fields including politics, science, medicine, and business. One obvious adverse effect of misinformation is that MSMEs might lose trust in the digital market. Misinformation can even result in the devaluation of a product, sow mistrust among customers, and negatively impact the companies’ revenue. The reach of and speed with which misinformation can spread and ruin companies’ brands, as well as the overall difficulty businesses face in seeking recourse, may discourage MSMEs from fully embracing the digital ecosystem. 

MSMEs are essential for innovation, job development, and economic growth. They contribute considerably to the GDP and account for a sizable share of enterprises. They serve as engines of economic resilience in many nations, including India. Hence, a developing economy’s prosperity and sustainability depend on the MSMEs' growth and such digital threats might hinder this process of growth. 

There are widespread incidents of misinformation on social media, and these affect brand and product promotion. MSMEs also rely on online platforms for business activities, and threats such as misinformation and other digital risks can result in reputational damage and financial losses. A company's reputation being tarnished due to inaccurate information or a product or service being incorrectly represented are just some examples and these incidents can cause MSMSs to lose clients and revenue.

In the digital era, MSMEs need to be vigilant against false information in order to preserve their brand name, clientele, and financial standing. In the interconnected world of today, these organisations must develop digital literacy and resistance against misinformation in order to succeed in the long run. Information resilience is crucial for protecting and preserving their reputation in the online market.

The Impact of Misinformation on MSMEs

Misinformation can have serious financial repercussions, such as lost sales, higher expenses, legal fees, harm to the company's reputation, diminished consumer trust, bad press, and a long-lasting unfavourable impact on image. A company's products may lose value as a result of rumours, which might affect both sales and client loyalty. 

Inaccurate information can also result in operational mistakes, which can interrupt regular corporate operations and cost the enterprise a lot of money. When inaccurate information on a product's safety causes demand to decline and stockpiling problems to rise, supply chain disruptions may occur. Misinformation can also lead to operational and reputational issues, which can cause psychological stress and anxiety at work. The peace of the workplace and general productivity may suffer as a result. For MSMEs, false information has serious repercussions that impact their capacity to operate profitably, retain employees, and maintain a sustainable business. Companies need to make investments in cybersecurity defence, legal costs, and restoring consumer confidence and brand image in order to lessen the effects of false information and ensure smooth operations.

When we refer to the financial implications caused by misinformation spread in the market, be it about the product or the enterprise, the cost is two-fold in all scenarios: there is loss of revenue and then the organisation has to contend with the costs of countering the impact of the misinformation. Stock Price Volatility is one financial consequence for publicly-traded MSMEs, as misinformation can cause stock price fluctuations. Potential investors might be discouraged due to false negative information.

Further, the reputational damage consequences of misinformation on MSMEs is also a serious concern as a loss of their reputation can have long-term damages for a carefully-cultivated brand image. 

There are also operational disruptions caused by misinformation: for instance, false product recalls can take place and supplier mistrust or false claims about supplier reliability can disrupt procurement leading to disruptions in the operations of MSMEs. 

Misinformation can negatively impact employee morale and productivity due to its physiological effects. This leads to psychological stress and workplace tensions. Staff confidence is also affected due to the misinformation about the brand. Internal operational stability is a core component of any organisation’s success. 

Misinformation: Key Risk Areas for MSMEs

1. Product and Service Misinformation

For MSMEs, misinformation about products and services poses a serious danger since it undermines their credibility and the confidence clients place in the enterprise and its products or services. Because this misleading material might mix in with everyday activities and newsfeeds, viewers may find it challenging to identify fraudulent content. For example, falsehoods and rumours about a company or its goods may travel quickly through social media, impacting the confidence and attitude of customers. Algorithms that favour sensational material have the potential to magnify disinformation, resulting in the broad distribution of erroneous information that can harm a company's brand.

2. False Customer Reviews and Testimonials

False testimonies and evaluations pose a serious risk to MSMEs. These might be abused to damage a company's brand or lead to unfair competition. False testimonials, for instance, might mislead prospective customers about the calibre or quality of a company’s offerings, while phony reviews can cause consumers to mistrust a company's goods or services. These actions frequently form a part of larger plans by rival companies or bad individuals to weaken a company's position in the market.

3. Misleading Information about Business Practices

False statements or distortions regarding a company's operations constitute misleading information about business practices. This might involve dishonest marketing, fabrications regarding the efficacy or legitimacy of goods, and inaccurate claims on a company's compliance with laws or moral principles. Such incorrect information can result in a decline in consumer confidence, harm to one's reputation, and even legal issues if consumers or rival businesses act upon it. Even before the truth is confirmed, for example, allegations of wrongdoing or criminal activity pertaining can inflict a great deal of harm, even if they are disproven later.

4. Fake News Related to Industry and Market Conditions

By skewing consumer views and company actions, fake news about market and industry circumstances can have a significant effect on MSMEs. For instance, false information about market trends, regulations, or economic situations might make consumers lose faith in particular industries or force corporations to make poor strategic decisions. The rapid dissemination of misinformation on online platforms intensifies its effects on enterprises that significantly depend on digital engagement for their operations.

Factors Contributing to the Vulnerability of MSMEs

1. Limited Resources for Verification

MSMEs have a small resource pool. Information verification is typically not a top priority for most. MSMEs usually lack the resources needed to verify the information and given their limited resources, they usually tend to deploy the same towards other, more seemingly-critical functions. They are more susceptible to misleading information because they lack the capacity to do thorough fact-checking or validate the authenticity of digital content. Technology tools, human capital, and financial resources are all in low supply but they are essential requirements for effective verification processes.

2. Inadequate Digital Literacy

Digital literacy is required for effective day-to-day operations. Fake reviews, rumours, or fake images commonly used by malicious actors can result in increased scrutiny or backlash against the targeted business. The lack of awareness combined with limited resources usually spells out a pale redressal plan on part of the affected MSME. Due to their low digital literacy in this domain, a large number of MSMEs are more susceptible to false information and other online threats. Inadequate knowledge and abilities to use digital platforms securely and effectively can result in making bad decisions and raising one's vulnerability to fraud, deception, and online scams.

3. Lack of Crisis Management Plans

MSMEs frequently function without clear-cut procedures for handling crises. They lack the strategic preparation necessary to deal with the fallout from disinformation and cyberattacks. Proactive crisis management plans usually incorporate procedures for detecting, addressing, and lessening the impact of digital harms, which are frequently absent from MSMEs.

4. High Dependence on Social Media and Online Platforms

The marketing strategy for most MSMEs is heavily reliant on social media and online platforms. While the digital-first nature of operations reduces the need for a large capital to set up in the form of stores or outlets, it also gives them a higher need to stay relevant to the trends of the online community and make their products attractive to the customer base. However, MSMEs are depending more and more on social media and other online channels for marketing, customer interaction, and company operations. These platforms are really beneficial, but they also put organisations at a higher risk of false information and online fraud. Heavy reliance on these platforms coupled with the absence of proper security measures and awareness can result in serious interruptions to operations and monetary losses.

CyberPeace Policy Recommendations to Enhance Information Resilience for MSMEs

CyberPeace advocates for establishing stronger legal frameworks to protect MSMEs from misinformation. Governments should establish regulations to build trust in online business activities and mitigate fraud and misinformation risks. Mandatory training programs should be implemented to cover online safety and misinformation awareness for MSME businesses. Enhanced reporting mechanisms should be developed to address digital harm incidents promptly. Governments should establish strict penalties for deliberate inaccurate misinformation spreaders, similar to those for copyright or intellectual property violations. Community-based approaches should be encouraged to help MSMEs navigate digital challenges effectively. Donor communities and development agencies should invest in digital literacy and cybersecurity training for MSMEs, focusing on misinformation mitigation and safe online practices. Platform accountability should be increased, with social media and online platforms playing a more active role in removing content from known scam networks and responding to fraudulent activity reports. There should be investment in comprehensive digital literacy solutions for MSMEs that incorporate cyber hygiene and discernment skills to combat misinformation.

‍Conclusion

Misinformation poses a serious risk to MSME’s digital resilience, operational effectiveness, and financial stability. MSMEs are susceptible to false information because of limited technical resources, lack of crisis management strategies, and insufficient digital literacy. They are also more vulnerable to false information and online fraud because of their heavy reliance on social media and other online platforms. To address these challenges it is significant to strengthen their cyber hygiene and information resilience. Robust policy and regulatory frameworks are encouraged, promoting and mandating online safety training programmes, and improved reporting procedures, are required to overall enhance the information landscape. 

References:

1. https://www.dai.com/uploads/digital-downsides.pdf
2. https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/2013/3/A2006-27.pdf
3. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=1946375
4. https://dai-global-digital.com/digital-downsides-the-economic-impact-of-misinformation-and-other-digital-harms-on-msmes-in-kenya-india-and-cambodia.html
5. https://www.dai.com/uploads/digital-downsides.pdf

‍

The 2020s mark the emergence of deepfakes in general media discourse. The rise in deepfake technology is defined by a very simple yet concerning fact: it is now possible to create perfect imitations of anyone using AI tools that can create audio in any person's voice and generate realistic images and videos of almost anyone doing pretty much anything. The proliferation of deepfake content in the media poses great challenges to the functioning of democracies. especially as such materials can deprive the public of the accurate information it needs to make informed decisions in elections. Deepfakes are created using AI, which combines different technologies to produce synthetic content.

Understanding Deepfakes 

Deepfakes are synthetically generated content created using artificial intelligence (AI). This technology works on an advanced algorithm that creates hyper-realistic videos by using a person’s face, voice or likeness utilising techniques such as machine learning. The utilisation and progression of deepfake technology holds vast potential, both benign and malicious. 

An example is when the NGO Malaria No More which had used deepfake technology in 2019 to sync David Beckham’s lip movements with different voices in nine languages, amplified its anti-malaria message.

Deepfakes have a dark side too. They have been used to spread false information, manipulate public opinion, and damage reputations. They can harm mental health and have significant social impacts. The ease of creating deepfakes makes it difficult to verify media authenticity, eroding trust in journalism and creating confusion about what is true and what is not. Their potential to cause harm has made it necessary to consider legal and regulatory approaches.

India’s Legal Landscape Surrounding Deepfakes

India presently lacks a specific law dealing with deepfakes, but the existing legal provisions offer some safeguards against mischief caused. 

• Deepfakes created with the intent of spreading misinformation or damaging someone’s reputation can be prosecuted under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita of 2023. It deals with the consequences of such acts under Section 356, governing defamation law.
• The Information Technology Act of 2000, the primary law that regulates Indian cyberspace. Any unauthorised disclosure of personal information which is used to create deepfakes for harassment or voyeurism is a violation of the act.
• The unauthorised use of a person's likeness in a deepfake can become a violation of their intellectual property rights and lead to copyright infringement.
• India’s privacy law, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, regulates and limits the misuse of personal data. It has the potential to address deepfakes by ensuring that individuals’ likenesses are not used without their consent in digital contexts.

India, at present, needs legislation that can specifically address the challenges deepfakes pose. The proposed legislation, aptly titled, ‘the Digital India Act’ aims to tackle various digital issues, including the misuse of deepfake technology and the spread of misinformation. Additionally, states like Maharashtra have proposed laws targeting deepfakes used for defamation or fraud, highlighting growing concerns about their impact on the digital landscape.

Policy Approaches to Regulation of Deepfakes

• Criminalising and penalising the making, creation and distribution of harmful deepfakes as illegal will act as a deterrent.
• There should be a process that mandates the disclosures for synthetic media. This would be to inform viewers that the content has been created using AI. 
• Encouraging tech companies to implement stricter policies on deepfake content moderation can enhance accountability and reduce harmful misinformation.
• The public’s understanding of deepfakes should be promoted. Especially, via awareness campaigns that will empower citizens to critically evaluate digital content and make informed decisions.

Deepfake, Global Overview

There has been an increase in the momentum to regulate deepfakes globally. In October 2023, US President Biden signed an executive order on AI risks instructing the US Commerce Department to form labelling standards for AI-generated content. California and Texas have passed laws against the dangerous distribution of deepfake images that affect electoral contexts and Virginia has targeted a law on the non-consensual distribution of deepfake pornography. 

China promulgated regulations requiring explicit marking of doctored content. The European Union has tightened its Code of Practice on Disinformation by requiring social media to flag deepfakes, otherwise they risk facing hefty fines and proposed transparency mandates under the EU AI Act. These measures highlight a global recognition of the risks that deepfakes pose and the need for a robust regulatory framework.

Conclusion 

With deepfakes being a significant source of risk to trust and democratic processes, a multi-pronged approach to regulation is in order. From enshrining measures against deepfake technology in specific laws and penalising the same, mandating transparency and enabling public awareness, the legislators have a challenge ahead of them. National and international efforts have highlighted the urgent need for a comprehensive framework to enable measures to curb the misuse and also promote responsible innovation. Cooperation during these trying times will be important to shield truth and integrity in the digital age. 

References

• https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2245&context=jss
• https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/regulating-deepfakes-generative-ai-in-india-explained/article67591640.ece
• https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/regulating-ai-deepfakes-and-synthetic-media-political-arena
• https://www.responsible.ai/a-look-at-global-deepfake-regulation-approaches/
• https://thesecretariat.in/article/wake-up-call-for-law-making-on-deepfakes-and-misinformation 

‍

The global race for Artificial Intelligence is heating up, and India has become one of its most important battlegrounds. Over the past few months, tech giants like OpenAI (ChatGPT), Google (Gemini), X (Grok), Meta (Llama), and Perplexity AI have stepped up their presence in the country,  not by selling their AI tools, but by offering them free or at deep discounts.

At first, it feels like a huge win for India’s digital generation. Students, professionals, and entrepreneurs today can tap into some of the world’s most powerful AI tools without paying a rupee. It feels like a digital revolution unfolding in real time. Yet, beneath this generosity lies a more complicated truth. Experts caution that this wave of “free” AI access isn’t without strings attached. This offering impacts how India handles data privacy, the fairness of competition, and the pace of the development of homegrown AI innovation that the country is focusing on. 

‍

The Market Strategy: Free Now, Pay Later  

‍

The choice of global AI companies to offer free access in India is a calculated business strategy. With one of the world’s largest and fastest-growing digital populations, India is a market no tech giant wants to miss. By giving away their AI tools for free, these firms are playing a long game:

1. Securing market share early: Flooding the market with free access helps them quickly attract millions of users before Indian startups have a chance to catch up. Recent examples are Perplexity, ChatGPT Go and Gemini AI which are offering free subscriptions to Indian users. 
2. Gathering local data: Every interaction, every prompt, question, or language pattern, helps these models learn from larger datasets to improve their product offerings in India and the rest of the world. Nothing is free in the world - as the popular saying goes, “if something is free, means you are the product. The same goes for these AI platforms: they monetise user data by analysing chats and their behaviour to refine their model and build paid products. This creates the privacy risk as India currently lacks specific laws to govern how such data is stored, processed or used for AI training. 
3. Create user dependency: Once users grow accustomed to the quality and convenience of these global models, shifting to Indian alternatives,  even when they become paid, will be difficult. This approach mirrors the “freemium” model used in other tech sectors, where users are first attracted through free access and later monetised through subscriptions or premium features, raising ethical concerns.  

Impact on Indian Users

‍

For most Indians, the short-term impact of free AI access feels overwhelmingly positive. Tools like ChatGPT and Gemini are breaking down barriers by democratising knowledge and making advanced technology available to everyone, from students, professionals, to small businesses.  It’s changing how people learn, think and do - all without spending a single rupee.But the long-term picture isn’t quite as simple. Beneath the convenience lies a set of growing concerns:

• Data privacy risks: Many users don’t realise that their chats, prompts, or queries might be stored and used to train global AI models. Without strong data protection laws in action, sensitive Indian data could easily find its way into foreign systems.
• Overdependence on foreign technology: Once these AI tools become part of people’s daily lives, moving away from them gets harder — especially if free access later turns into paid plans or comes with restrictive conditions.
• Language and cultural bias: Most large AI models are still built mainly around English and Western data. Without enough Indian language content and cultural representation, the technology risks overlooking the very diversity that defines India

Impact on India’s AI Ecosystem  

India’s Generative AI market, valued at USD $ 1.30 billion in 2024, is projected to reach 5.40 billion by 2033. Yet, this growth story may become uneven if global players dominate early.  

Domestic AI startups face multiple hurdles — limited funding, high compute costs, and difficulty in accessing large, diverse datasets. The arrival of free, GPT-4-level models sharpens these challenges by raising user expectations and increasing customer acquisition costs.  

As AI analyst Kashyap Kompella notes, “If users can access GPT-4-level quality at zero cost, their incentive to try local models that still need refinement will be low.” This could stifle innovation at home, resulting in a shallow domestic AI ecosystem where India consumes global technology but contributes little to its creation.  

CCI’s Intervention: Guarding Fair Competition  

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has started taking note of how global AI companies are shaping India’s digital market. In a recent report, it cautioned that AI-driven pricing strategies such as offering free or heavily subsidised access could distort healthy competition and create an uneven playing field for smaller Indian developers.

The CCI’s decision to step in is both timely and necessary. Without proper oversight, such tactics could gradually push homegrown AI startups to the sidelines and allow a few foreign tech giants to gain disproportionate influence over India’s emerging AI economy.  

 What the Indian Government Should Do  

To ensure India’s AI landscape remains competitive, inclusive, and innovation-driven, the government must adopt a balanced strategy that safeguards users while empowering local developers.  

 1. Promote Fair Competition  

The government should mandate transparency in free access offers, including their duration, renewal terms, and data-use policies.  Exclusivity deals between foreign AI firms and telecom or device companies must be closely monitored to prevent monopolistic practices.  

 2. Strengthen Data Protection 

Under the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, companies should be required to obtain explicit consent from users before using data for model training.  Encourage data localisation, ensuring that sensitive Indian data remains stored within India’s borders.  

3. Support Domestic AI Innovation  

Accelerate the implementation of the IndiaAI Mission to provide public compute infrastructure, open datasets, and research funding to local AI developers like  Sarvam AI, an Indian company chosen by the government to build the country's first homegrown large language model (LLM) under IndianAI Mission. 

4. Create an Open AI Ecosystem

India should develop national AI benchmarks to evaluate all models, foreign or domestic, on performance, fairness, and linguistic diversity. And at the same time, they have their own national data Centre to train their indigenous  AI models. 

5. Encourage Responsible Global Collaboration

Speaking at the AI Action Summit 2025, the Prime Minister highlighted that governance should go beyond managing risks and should also promote innovation for the global good. Building on this idea, India should encourage global AI companies to invest meaningfully in the country’s ecosystem through research labs, data centres, and AI education programmes. Such collaborations will ensure that these partnerships not only expand markets but also create value, jobs and knowledge within India.

Conclusion

The surge of free AI access across India represents a defining moment in the nation’s digital journey. On one hand, it’s empowering millions of people and accelerating AI awareness like never before. On the other hand, it poses serious challenges from over-reliance on foreign platforms to potential risks around data privacy and the slow growth of local innovation. India’s real test will be finding the right balance between access and autonomy, allowing global AI leaders to innovate and operate here, but within a framework that protects the interests of Indian users, startups, and data ecosystems. With strong and timely action under the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act, the IndiaAI Mission, and the Competition Commission of India’s (CCI) active oversight, India can make sure this AI revolution isn’t just something that happens to the country, but for it. 

References

1. https://www.moneycontrol.com/artificial-intelligence/cci-study-flags-steep-barriers-for-indian-ai-startups-calls-for-open-data-and-compute-access-to-level-playing-field-article-13600606.html# 
2. https://www.imarcgroup.com/india-generative-ai-market 
3. https://www.mea.gov.in/Speeches-Statements.htm?dtl/39020/Opening_Address_by_Prime_Minister_Shri_Narendra_Modi_at_the_AI_Action_Summit_Paris_February_11_2025 
4. https://m.economictimes.com/tech/artificial-intelligence/nasscom-planning-local-benchmarks-for-indic-ai-models/articleshow/124218208.cms 
5. https://indianexpress.com/article/business/centre-selects-start-up-sarvam-to-build-country-first-homegrown-ai-model-9967243/# 

‍