#FactCheck -Viral video of Yogi Adityanath and Ravi Kishan’s march is not a UGC protest
Executive Summary
A video circulating on social media shows Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and Gorakhpur MP Ravi Kishan walking with a group of people. Users are claiming that the two leaders were participating in a protest against the University Grants Commission (UGC). Research by CyberPeace has found the viral claim to be misleading. Our research revealed that the video is from September 2025 and is being shared out of context with recent events. The video was recorded when Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath undertook a foot march in Gorakhpur on a Monday. Ravi Kishan, MP from Gorakhpur, was also present. During the march, the Chief Minister visited local markets, malls, and shops, interacting with traders and gathering information on the implementation of GST rate cuts.
Claim Details:
On Instagram, a user shared the viral video on 27 January 2026. The video shows the Chief Minister and the MP walking with a group of people. The text “UGC protest” appears on the video, suggesting that it is connected to a protest against the University Grants Commission.

Fact Check:
To verify the claim, we searched Google using relevant keywords, but found no credible media reports confirming it.Next, we extracted key frames from the video and searched them using Google Lens. The video was traced to NBT Uttar Pradesh’s X (formerly Twitter) account, posted on 22 September 2025.

According to NBT Uttar Pradesh, CM Yogi Adityanath undertook a foot march in Gorakhpur, visiting malls and shops to interact with traders and check the implementation of GST rate cuts.
Conclusion:
The viral video is not related to any recent UGC guidelines. It dates back to September 2025, showing CM Yogi Adityanath and MP Ravi Kishan on a foot march in Gorakhpur, interacting with traders about GST rate cuts.The claim that the video depicts a protest against the University Grants Commission is therefore false and misleading.
Related Blogs

Introduction
Regulatory agencies throughout Europe have stepped up their monitoring of digital communication platforms because of the increased use of Artificial Intelligence in the digital domain. Messaging services have evolved into being more than just messaging systems, they now serve as a gateway for Artificial Intelligence services, Business Tools and Digital Marketplaces. In light of this evolution, the Competition Authority in Italy has taken action against Meta Platforms and ordered Meta to cease activities on WhatsApp that are deemed to restrict the ability of other companies to sell AI-based chatbots. This action highlights the concerns surrounding Gatekeeping Power, Market Foreclosure and Innovation Suppression. This proceeding will also raise questions regarding the application of Competition Law to the actions of Dominant Digital Platforms, where they leverage their own ecosystems to promote their own AI products to the detriment of competitors.
Background of the Case
In December 2025, Italy’s competition authority, the Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM), ordered Meta Platforms to suspend certain contractual terms governing WhatsApp. These terms allegedly prevented or restricted the operation of third-party AI chatbots on WhatsApp’s platform.
The decision was issued as an interim measure during an ongoing antitrust investigation. According to the AGCM, the disputed terms risked excluding competing AI chatbot providers from accessing a critical digital channel, thereby distorting competition and harming consumer choice.
Why WhatsApp Matters as a Digital Gateway
WhatsApp is situated uniquely within the European digital landscape. It has hundreds of millions of users throughout the entire European Union; therefore, it is an integral part of the communication infrastructure that supports communications between individual consumers and companies as well as between companies and their service providers. AI chatbot developers depend heavily upon WhatsApp as it provides the ability to connect directly with consumers in real-time, which is critical to their success as business offers.
According to the Italian regulator's opinion, a corporation that controls the ability to communicate via such a popular platform has a tremendous influence over innovation within that market as it essentially operates as a gatekeeper between the company creating an innovative service and the consumer using that service. If Meta is permitted to stop competing AI chatbot developers while providing more productive and useful offers than those offered by competing developers, it is likely that competing developers will be unable to market and distribute their innovative products at sufficient scale to remain competitive.
Alleged Abuse of Dominant Position
Under EU and national competition law, companies holding a dominant market position bear a special responsibility not to distort competition. The AGCM’s concern is that Meta may have abused WhatsApp’s dominance by:
- Restricting market access for rival AI chatbot providers
- Limiting technical development by preventing interoperability
- Strengthening Meta’s own AI ecosystem at the expense of competitors
Such conduct, if proven, could amount to an abuse under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Importantly, the authority emphasised that even contractual terms—rather than explicit bans—can have exclusionary effects when imposed by a dominant platform.
Meta’s Response and Infrastructure Argument
Meta has openly condemned the Italian ruling as “fundamentally flawed,” arguing that third-party AI chatbots represent a major economic burden to the infrastructure and risk the performance, safety, and user enjoyment of WhatsApp.
Although the protection of infrastructure is a valid issue of concern, competition authorities commonly look at whether the justifications for such restrictions are appropriate and non-discriminatory. One of the principal legal issues is whether the restrictions imposed by Meta were applied in a uniform manner or whether they were selectively imposed in favour of Meta's AI services. If the restrictions are asymmetrical in application, they may be viewed as anti-competitive rather than as legitimate technical safeguards.
Link to the EU’s Digital Markets Framework
The Italian case fits into a wider EU context in relation to their efforts to regulate the actions of large technology companies with the use of prior (ex-ante) regulation as contained in the Digital Markets Act (DMA). The DMA has put in place obligations on a set of gatekeepers to make available to third parties on a non-discriminatory basis in order to maintain equitable access, interoperability and no discrimination against those parties.
While the Italian case has been brought pursuant to an Italian competition law, its philosophy is consistent with that of the DMA in that dominant digital platforms should not undertake actions that use their control over their core products and services to prevent other companies from being able to innovate. The trend with some EU national regulators is to be increasingly willing to take swift action through the application of interim measures rather than await many years for final decisions.
Implications for AI Developers and Platforms
The Italian order signifies to developers of AI-based chatbots that competitive access to AI technology via messaging services is an important factor for regulatory bodies. The order also serves as a warning to the large incumbent organisations that are establishing a foothold in the messaging services market to integrate AI into their already established platforms that they will not be protected from competition laws.
Additionally, the overall case showcases the growing consensus amongst regulatory agencies regarding the role of competition in the development of AI. If a handful of large companies are allowed to control both the infrastructure and the AI technology being operated on top of that infrastructure, the result will likely be the development of closed ecosystems that eliminate or greatly reduce the potential for technology diversity.
Conclusion
Italy's move against Meta highlights a significant intersection between competitive laws and artificial intelligence. The Italian antitrust authority has reinforced the principle that digital gatekeepers cannot use contractual methods to block off access to competition in targeting WhatsApp's restrictive terms. As AI becomes a larger part of our day to day digital services, regulatory bodies will likely continue to increase their scrutiny on platform behaviour. The result of this investigation will impact not just the Metaverse's AI strategy, but also create a baseline for future European regulators' methods of balancing innovation versus competition versus consumer choice in an increasingly AI-driven digital marketplace.
References
- https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/boards-policy-regulation/italy-watchdog-orders-meta-halt-whatsapp-terms-barring-rival-ai-chatbots-2025-12-24/
- https://techcrunch.com/2025/12/24/italy-tells-meta-to-suspend-its-policy-that-bans-rival-ai-chatbots-from-whatsapp/
- https://www.communicationstoday.co.in/italy-watchdog-orders-meta-to-halt-whatsapp-terms-barring-rival-ai-chatbots/
- https://www.techinasia.com/news/italy-watchdog-orders-meta-halt-whatsapp-terms-ai-bot

Introduction
In the face of escalating cybercrimes in India, criminals are adopting increasingly inventive methods to deceive victims. Imagine opening your phone to the notification of an incoming message from a stranger with a friendly introduction - a beginning that appears harmless, but is the beginning of an awful financial nightmare. "Pig Butchering '' scam—an increasingly sophisticated form of deception that's gaining more widespread popularity. Unlike any other scams, this one plays a long game, spinning a web of trust before it strikes. It's a modern-day financial thriller happening in the real world, with real victims. "pig butchering" scam, involves building trust through fake profiles and manipulating victims emotionally to extort money. The scale of such scams has raised concerns, emphasising the need for awareness and vigilance in the face of evolving cyber threats.
How does 'Pig Butchering' Scam Work?
At its core, the scam starts innocuously, often with a stranger reaching out via text, social media, or apps like WhatsApp or WeChat. The scammer, hiding behind a well-crafted and realistic online persona, seeks to forge a connection. This could be under the pretence of friendship or romance, employing fake photos and stories to seem authentic. Gradually, the scammer builds a rapport, engaging in personal and often non-financial conversations. They may portray themselves as a widow, single parent, or even a military member to evoke empathy and trust. Over time, this connection pivots to investment opportunities, with the scammer presenting lucrative tips or suggestions in stocks or cryptocurrencies. Initially, modest investments are encouraged, and falsified returns are shown to lure in larger sums. Often, the scammer claims affiliation with a profitable financial institution or success in cryptocurrency trading. They direct victims to specific, usually fraudulent, trading platforms under their control. The scam reaches its peak when significant investments are made, only for the scammer to manipulate the situation, block access to the trading platform, or vanish, leaving the victim with substantial losses.
Real-Life Examples and Global Reach
These scams are not confined to one region. In India, for instance, scammers use emotional manipulation, often starting with a WhatsApp message from an unknown, attractive individual. They pose as professionals offering part-time jobs, leading victims through tasks that escalate in investment and complexity. These usually culminate in cryptocurrency investments, with victims unable to withdraw their funds, the money often traced to accounts in Dubai.
In the West, several cases highlight the scam's emotional and financial toll: A Michigan woman was lured by an online boyfriend claiming to make money from gold trading. She invested through a fake brokerage, losing money while being emotionally entangled. A Canadian man named Sajid Ikram lost nearly $400,000 in a similar scam, initially misled by a small successful withdrawal. In California, a man lost $440,000, succumbing to pressure to invest more, including retirement savings and borrowed money. A Maryland victim faced continuous demands from scammers, losing almost $1.4 million in hopes of recovering previous losses. A notable case involved US authorities seizing about $9 million in cryptocurrency linked to a global pig butchering scam, showcasing its extensive reach.
Safeguarding Against Such Scams
Vigilance is crucial to prevent falling victim to these scams. Be skeptical of unsolicited contacts and wary of investment advice from strangers. Conduct thorough research before any financial engagement, particularly on unfamiliar platforms. Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Center warns of red flags like sudden large virtual currency transactions, interest in high-return investments mentioned by new online contacts, and atypical customer behaviour.
Victims should report incidents to various Indian and foreign websites and the Securities Exchange Commission. Financial institutions are advised to report suspicious activities related to these scams. In essence, the pig butchering scam is a cunning blend of emotional manipulation and financial fraud. Staying informed and cautious is key to avoiding these sophisticated traps.
Conclusion
The Pig Butchering Scams are one of the many new breeds of emerging cyber scams that have become a bone of contention for cyber security organisations. It is imperative for netizens to stay vigilant and well-informed about the dynamics of cyberspace and emerging cyber crimes.
References
- https://www.sentinelassam.com/more-news/national-news/from-impersonating-cbi-officers-to-pig-butchering-cyber-criminals-get-creative
- https://hiindia.com/from-impersonating-cbi-officers-to-pig-butchering-cyber-criminals-get-creative/

Introduction
In July 2025, the Digital Trust & Safety Partnership (DTSP) achieved a significant milestone with the formal acceptance of its Safe Framework Specification as an international standard, ISO/IEC 25389. This is the first globally recognised standard that is exclusively concerned with guaranteeing a secure online experience for the general public's use of digital goods and services.
Significance of the New Framework
Fundamentally, ISO/IEC 25389 provides organisations with an organised framework for recognising, controlling, and reducing risks associated with conduct or content. This standard, which was created under the direction of ISO/IEC's Joint Technical Committee 1 (JTC 1), integrates the best practices of DTSP and offers a precise way to evaluate organisational maturity in terms of safety and trust. Crucially, it offers the first unified international benchmark, allowing organisations globally to coordinate on common safety pledges and regularly assess progress.
Other Noteworthy Standards and Frameworks
While ISO/IEC 25389 is pioneering, it’s not the only framework shaping digital trust and safety:
- One of the main outcomes of the United Nations’ 2024 Summit for the Future was the UN's Global Digital Compact, which describes cross-border cooperation on secure and reliable digital environments with an emphasis on countering harmful content, upholding online human rights, and creating accountability standards.
- The World Economic Forum’s Digital Trust Framework defines the goals and values, such as cybersecurity, privacy, transparency, redressability, auditability, fairness, interoperability and safety, implicit to the concept of digital trust. It also provides a roadmap to digital trustworthiness that imbibes these dimensions.
- The Framework for Integrity, Security and Trust (FIST) launched at the Cybereace Summit 2023 at USI of India in New Delhi, calls for a multistakeholder approach to co-create solutions and best practices for digital trust and safety.
- While still in the finalisation stage for implementation rollout, India's Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDP Act) and its Rules (2025) aim to strike a balance between individual rights and data processing needs by establishing a groundwork for data security and privacy.
- India is developing frameworks in cutting-edge technologies like artificial intelligence. Using a hub-and-spoke model under the IndiaAI Mission, the AI Safety Institute was established in early 2025 with the goal of creating standards for trustworthy, moral, and safe AI systems. Furthermore, AI standards with an emphasis on safety and dependability are being drafted by the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS).
- Google's DigiKavach program (2023) and Google Safety Engineering Centre (GSEC) in Hyderabad are concrete efforts to support digital safety and fraud prevention in India's tech sector.
What It Means for India
India is already claiming its place in discussions about safety and trust around the world. Google's June 2025 safety charter for India, for example, highlights how India's distinct digital scale, diversity, and vast threat landscape provide insights that inform global cybersecurity strategies.
For India's digital ecosystem, ISO/IEC 25389 comes at a critical juncture. Global best practices in safety and trust are desperately needed as a result of the rapid adoption of digital technologies, including the growth of digital payments, e-governance, and artificial intelligence and a concomitant rise in instances of digital harms. Through its guidelines, ISO/IEC 25389 provides a reference benchmark that Indian startups, government agencies, and tech companies can use to improve their safety standards.
Conclusion
A global trust-and-safety standard like ISO/IEC 25389 is essential for making technology safer for people, even as we discuss the broader adoption of security and safety-by-design principles integrated into the processes of technological product development. India can improve user protection, build its reputation globally, and solidify its position as a key player in the creation of a safer, more resilient digital future by implementing this framework in tandem with its growing domestic regulatory framework (such as the DPDP Act and AI Safety policies).
References
- https://dtspartnership.org/the-safe-framework-specification/
- https://dtspartnership.org/press-releases/dtsps-safe-framework-published-as-an-international-standard/?
- https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/04/united-nations-global-digital-compact-trust-security/?
- https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/google-releases-safety-charter-for-india-senior-exec-details-top-cyber-threat-actors-in-the-country/articleshow/121903651.cms?
- https://initiatives.weforum.org/digital-trust/framework
- https://government.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/secure-india/the-launch-of-fist-framework-for-integrity-security-and-trust/103302090