#FactCheck- Viral Zipline Accident Video from Karnaprayag is AI-Generated, Claim is False

Introduction

In India, the rights of children with regard to protection of their personal data are enshrined under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 which is the newly enacted digital personal data protection law of India. The DPDP Act requires that for the processing of children's personal data, verifiable consent of parents or legal guardians is a necessary requirement. If the consent of parents or legal guardians is not obtained then it constitutes a violation under the DPDP Act. Under section 2(f) of the DPDP act, a “child” means an individual who has not completed the age of eighteen years. 

Section 9 under the DPDP Act, 2023

With reference to the collection of children's data section 9 of the DPDP Act, 2023 provides that for children below 18 years of age, consent from Parents/Legal Guardians is required. The Data Fiduciary shall, before processing any personal data of a child or a person with a disability who has a lawful guardian, obtain verifiable consent from the parent or the lawful guardian. Section 9 aims to create a safer online environment for children by limiting the exploitation of their data for commercial purposes or otherwise. By virtue of this section, the parents and guardians will have more control over their children's data and privacy and they are empowered to make choices as to how they manage their children's online activities and the permissions they grant to various online services. 

Section 9 sub-section (3) specifies that a Data Fiduciary shall not undertake tracking or behavioural monitoring of children or targeted advertising directed at children. However, section 9 sub-section (5) further provides room for exemption from this prohibition by empowering the Central Government which may notify exemption to specific data fiduciaries or data processors from the behavioural tracking or target advertising prohibition under the future DPDP Rules which are yet to be announced or released. 

Impact on social media platforms

Social media companies are raising concerns about Section 9 of the DPDP Act and upcoming Rules for the DPDP Act. Section 9 prohibits behavioural tracking or targeted advertising directed at children on digital platforms. By prohibiting intermediaries from tracking a ‘child's internet activities’ and ‘targeted advertising’ - this law aims to preserve children's privacy. However, social media corporations contended that this limitation adversely affects the efficacy of safety measures intended to safeguard young users, highlighting the necessity of monitoring specific user signals, including from minors, to guarantee the efficacy of safety measures designed for them.

Social media companies assert that tracking teenagers' behaviour is essential for safeguarding them from predators and harmful interactions. They believe that a complete ban on behavioural tracking is counterproductive to the government's objectives of protecting children. The scope to grant exemption leaves the door open for further advocacy on this issue. Hence it necessitates coordination with the concerned ministry and relevant stakeholders to find a balanced approach that maintains both privacy and safety for young users.

Furthermore, the impact on social media platforms also extends to the user experience and the operational costs required to implement the functioning of the changes created by regulations. This also involves significant changes to their algorithms and data-handling processes. Implementing robust age verification systems to identify young users and protect their data will also be a technically challenging step for the various scales of platforms. Ensuring that children’s data is not used for targeted advertising or behavioural monitoring also requires sophisticated data management systems. The blanket ban on targeted advertising and behavioural tracking may also affect the personalisation of content for young users, which may reduce their engagement with the platform.

For globally operating platforms, aligning their practices with the DPDP Act in India while also complying with data protection laws in other countries (such as GDPR in Europe or COPPA in the US) can be complex and resource-intensive. Platforms might choose to implement uniform global policies for simplicity, which could impact their operations in regions not governed by similar laws. On the same page, competitive dynamics such as market shifts where smaller or niche platforms that cater specifically to children and comply with these regulations may gain a competitive edge. There may be a drive towards developing new, compliant ways of monetizing user interactions that do not rely on behavioural tracking.

CyberPeace Policy Recommendations

A balanced strategy should be taken into account which gives weightage to the contentions of social media companies as well as to the protection of children's personal information. Instead of a blanket ban, platforms can be obliged to follow and encourage openness in advertising practices, ensuring that children are not exposed to any misleading or manipulative marketing techniques. Self-regulation techniques can be implemented to support ethical behaviour, responsibility, and the safety of young users’ online personal information through the platform’s practices. Additionally, verifiable consent should be examined and put forward in a manner which is practical and the platforms have a say in designing the said verification. Ultimately, this should be dealt with in a manner that behavioural tracking and targeted advertising are not affecting the children's well-being, safety and data protection in any way. 

Final Words

Under section 9 of the DPDP Act, the prohibition of behavioural tracking and targeted advertising in case of processing children's personal data - will compel social media platforms to overhaul their data collection and advertising practices, ensuring compliance with stricter privacy regulations. The legislative intent behind this provision is to enhance and strengthen the protection of children's digital personal data security and privacy. As children are particularly vulnerable to digital threats due to their still-evolving maturity and cognitive capacities, the protection of their privacy stands as a priority. The innocence of children is a major cause for concern when it comes to digital access because children simply do not possess the discernment and caution required to be able to navigate the Internet safely. Furthermore, a balanced approach needs to be adopted which maintains both ‘privacy’ and ‘safety’ for young users.

References

• https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Digital%20Personal%20Data%20Protection%20Act%202023.pdf 
• https://www.firstpost.com/tech/as-govt-of-india-starts-preparing-rules-for-dpdp-act-social-media-platforms-worried-13789134.html#google_vignette
• https://www.business-standard.com/industry/news/social-media-platforms-worry-new-data-law-could-affect-child-safety-ads-124070400673_1.html

‍

Introduction

Delhi is Delhi-ing these days — whether it's the protest, the monsoon weather, the ongoing Monsoon Session of Parliament, metro disruptions, or just the general chaos of it all. Amid everything else, it's been over 30 days, starting from late June 2026, since the large public march organised in part by the group known as the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) converged near Parliament and on Jantar Mantar, and the city hasn't quite exhaled since. Like every large, fast-moving public event, it's come with a parallel flood online: photos, video clips, injury claims, and hot takes pouring in from participants, bystanders, and news outlets alike, all competing for your instagram scroll.

CyberPeace is a non-partisan digital trust and safety organisation, and what we do care about is the online information environment building up around the event — helping people spot misinformation and manipulated media, and encouraging a bit more caution before hitting "share" while rumours are moving faster than facts.

Delhi Police has already made a public appeal along similar lines, asking citizens against online spread of unverified rumours, noting that misinformation could make an already tense situation worse. This advisory builds on that, with some practical guidance for everyday netizens navigating the protest in light of social media.

Why This Matters Right Now

30 plus days in, the story has layers: the original hunger strike, the march itself, police action, viral clips, and now a second wave of commentary reacting to the reactions. Old footage resurfaces relabelled as "live." Numbers get inflated or deflated depending on who's sharing them. Screenshots go around stripped of context. The longer a protest runs, the murkier the timeline gets for anyone just scrolling past — which is exactly when misinformation finds the most room to spread.

The internet access was also restricted in parts of the city during the march, which has itself become a point of attention.

Given how much unverified information is already circulating, it's worth treating any single account of "what actually happened". The full picture will likely take time to emerge through credible reporting and scrutiny. 

Why This Moment Is Especially Prone to Misinformation

A few things are working together here to make mis-information spread faster than usual: Emotions are running high. Clashes, injuries, and confrontations naturally provoke strong reactions, and content that makes people angry or afraid tends to get shared quickly, with far less scrutiny than a calm, verified report would get.

There are information gaps. Reports of internet restrictions in parts of the city leave holes that get filled with speculation  or worse, old footage recycled and passed off as live updates.

The event is politically charged, which means competing narratives are synthetically being pushed from multiple directions, sometimes deliberately, making it harder to find neutral ground.

There's simply a huge volume of content. Thousands of clips and photos are being posted from one event, which makes it easy for unrelated or out-of-context material to slip in alongside the real thing. And then there's satire. Part of this movement has roots in political satire, so parody posts and meme accounts can easily be mistaken for genuine news if they're shared without context.

Common Types of Misleading Content to Watch For

A few patterns tend to show up again and again during events like this:

1. Old footage getting relabelled -  Photos or videos from a completely different protest, city, or even country, re-shared with a caption claiming it's from this event.
2. Clips taken out of context - A short moment, like a scuffle, shown without what happened right before or after it, changing how it reads.
3. Doctored images - Photos edited to add, remove, or exaggerate people, banners, injuries, or crowd size.
4. Fake official statements - Screenshots or graphics designed to look like they came from Delhi Police or a government department, but never actually issued.
5. Made-up casualty numbers - Figures shared with no real source, often vaguely attributed to "eyewitnesses."
6. Impersonation accounts - Handles designed to look like an official police or organiser account, sometimes just one letter off from the real one.
7. AI-generated visuals - Fully or partly synthetic images and videos showing scenes or crowds that never actually happened.
8. Rumours about shutdowns - Unverified claims about internet blackouts, road closures, or metro shutdowns that may be old, exaggerated, or simply untrue.

What Netizens Should Do:

• Pause before you forward. If a clip or claim makes you feel an instant, strong reaction, that's often the moment to slow down, not speed up.
• Check the timestamp and source. A five-day-old protest generates a lot of recycled footage. Reverse image/video search before assuming something is "breaking."
• Cross-check with more than one outlet. If only one account or page is reporting something dramatic, wait for corroboration.
• Be wary of numbers without sources. Injury counts, crowd sizes, and arrest figures are easy to exaggerate in either direction.
• Don't share unverified visuals of injuries or violence. Beyond accuracy concerns, this can also cause real harm to the people shown.
• When in doubt, don't repost — verify first, or simply sit it out.

How to Check a Claim Before You Share It:

A checklist goes a long way here:

1. Pause for a second. Content built to provoke a strong reaction is often designed to get past your defenses before you think twice. Just slowing down is itself protective.
2. Ask where it actually came from. Is this from a named journalist or outlet you can verify, or an anonymous forward with no clear origin? Messages that have clearly been passed around many times deserve extra suspicion.
3. Look for more than one source. If something significant is genuinely true, you'll usually find several independent, reputable outlets reporting it not just one channel or account.
4. Check the date and place. A quick reverse image or video search can tell you if a photo or clip has shown up online before, and what it was originally about.
5. Wait for official confirmation. For anything involving police action, injuries, or arrests, check verified accounts like Delhi Police, PIB, established news wires before treating a claim as settled fact.
6. Be suspicious of absolute language. Words like "confirmed," "breaking," or "exposed," used without naming any actual source, are a classic misinformation tell.
7. Look at the account, not just the post. New accounts with no history, or ones that only ever post about this one topic, deserve a second look.
8. Notice when something feels too satisfying. If a claim perfectly confirms what you already believed, that's exactly when you should slow down and check it; it's the content you're least likely to question on your own.

Reliable Fact-Checking Platforms and AI Detection Tools:

These resources can help you check specific claims, images, or videos:

1. For fact-checking: PIB Fact Check (factcheck.pib.gov.in) for anything involving government statements or orders; Alt News (altnews.in) and BOOM Live (boomlive.in), two independent Indian outlets that regularly cover protest- and politics-related claims.
2. For reverse image and video searches: Google Images, Google Lens, and TinEye can show you where a photo first appeared and in what context. InVID-WeVerify is a free browser plugin built for journalists that breaks videos into keyframes and lets you reverse-search individual frames.
3. For AI and synthetic media detection: Hive Moderation and Sensity AI offer public tools for checking images and video. Deepware Scanner focuses specifically on deepfake video. And most major platforms like Meta, YouTube, X are now labeling some AI-generated content automatically, though the absence of a label doesn't mean something's real.
4. A few terms worth knowing: A cheapfake is misleading media made with simple editing, cropping, slowing down, re-captioning rather than AI. These are still far more common than actual AI deepfakes. A deepfake is synthetic audio, video, or image content made with AI to convincingly show someone saying or doing something they didn't. Synthetic media is the broader umbrella term for any AI-generated content, whether or not it's being used to deceive.

Reporting Mechanism ~ If You Come Across Suspected Misinformation

Don't share it further, even to mock or correct it  any engagement can boost its reach. Check it against the fact-checking tools above before deciding what you think is true. Report it directly on the platform. If it falls  under the category of ‘Unlawful Content’ as per IT Rules, you can reach out to the grievance officer of the platform for removal of such content.

If it involves a government statement or order, send it to PIB Fact Check. If it looks like incitement, impersonation, extortion, or another cybercrime, report it to the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (cybercrime.gov.in) or call 1930. 

Further Steps & helplines

1. To file a cybercrime complaint: National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal - 1930 or cybercrime.gov.in 
2. To flag a fake government-related claim: PIB Fact Check - factcheck.pib.gov.in
3. For an on-ground emergency: dial 100 / 112 
4. CyberPeace Helpline: +91 9570000066 or helpline@cyberpeace.net
5. For fact check and debunking of any suspicious viral information, you can reach out to cyberpeace at helpline@cyberpeace.net
6. If this advisory feels useful, consider sharing it in family WhatsApp groups, community networks, or student and youth organisations as it helps slow the spread of unverified content when more people are thinking about it.

CyberPeace's Message to Netizens

Being first to share something isn't the same as being right. In moments like this, the most useful thing any of us can do is slow down, verify before sharing, be a little suspicious of content that confirms exactly what we already believed, and trust named, accountable sources over anonymous forwards. Misinformation during civic unrest doesn't just mislead people; it can raise tensions, put individuals at risk, and chip away at trust in both the media and the institutions meant to maintain public order.Our goal is simply to help people navigate the information around it a little more safely and critically.

Conclusion

Protests and public unrest always generate a flood of information, and not all of it will be accurate. What keeps that information environment healthy isn't any single authority or platform, it's the everyday habits of the people deciding, one post at a time, whether to check something or just pass it along.  Delhi's news cycle will keep moving, and this advisory isn't asking anyone to disengage from it. It's just a nudge to stay a little more careful with what you believe and what you pass on in this social media age. Pause. Verify. Scroll healthy. Stay CyberPeaceful.

References

1. https://rajkaran.in/delhi-police-urges-calm-amid-cjp-protest-warns-against-rumours-as-clashes-erupt-during-chalo-sansad-march
2. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/0kkSCYrjRGc
3. https://factcheck.pib.gov.in/
4. https://www.altnews.in/
5. https://www.boomlive.in/
6. https://www.vishvasnews.com/
7. https://www.factcrescendo.com/
8. https://cybercrime.gov.in/

Contributors

1. Neeraj Soni, Sr. Research Analyst, Policy & Advocacy, CyberPeace
2. Ritika Goswami, Intern - Policy & Advocacy, CyberPeace

‍

Executive Summary
‍

A video circulating on social media allegedly shows an Indian Army Air Defence JCO, identified as “Anurag Thakur,” criticising the Central government and announcing his resignation. In the clip, the individual is purportedly heard expressing disappointment with the government’s support for soldiers and claiming heavy casualties within his unit. However, an investigation by the CyberPeace Research Wing has found the claim to be false and the video manipulated.

‍

Claim:
‍

The viral post alleges that an Indian Army Air Defence JCO criticised the Centre and resigned, citing lack of support for soldiers and unacknowledged casualties.

• https://archive.ph/mGa5I 

‍

‍

Fact Check:
‍

A keyword search using terms such as “Indian Army Air Defence JCO,” “Anurag Thakur,” and “resignation” did not yield any credible news reports supporting the claim. A reverse image search of the viral clip led to an original video posted by ANI on April 22, 2026. The ANI watermark is also visible in the viral footage, confirming that the clip has been sourced from this original video.

‍

‍

In the authentic version, the same personnel appears in the same setting, but he is speaking in Hindi about operations against adversary drones during “Operation Sindoor” in May 2025. He explains how his unit detected and neutralised multiple drones, successfully safeguarding a critical installation. Importantly, the original video does not identify the individual as Anurag Thakur, nor does it contain any reference to resignation, casualties, or criticism of the government.

Further technical analysis using the AI detection tool Hive Moderation indicated that the audio in the viral clip has an 86 percent likelihood of being artificially generated.

‍

‍

Conclusion:
‍

The viral video has been altered with fabricated audio to falsely claim that an Indian Army officer criticised the government and resigned. The claim is baseless and the clip is a clear case of a deepfake created to mislead viewers.

‍