#FactCheck: AI-manipulated image falsely shows Indian High Commission official at PoK-related protest in UK

Executive Summary:

‍

A viral video claims to show a massive cumulonimbus cloud over Gurugram, Haryana, and Delhi NCR on 3rd September 2025. However, our research reveals the claim is misleading. A reverse image search traced the visuals to Lviv, Ukraine, dating back to August 2021. The footage matches earlier reports and was even covered by the Ukrainian news outlet 24 Kanal, which published the story under the headline “Lviv Covered by Unique Thundercloud: Amazing Video”. Thus, the viral claim linking the phenomenon to a recent event in India is false.

Claim:

‍

A viral video circulating on social media claims to show a massive cloud formation over Gurugram, Haryana, and the Delhi NCR region on 3rd September 2025. The cloud appears to be a cumulonimbus formation, which is typically associated with heavy rainfall, thunderstorms, and severe weather conditions.

‍

‍

Fact Check:

‍

After conducting a reverse image search on key frames of the viral video, we found matching visuals from videos that attribute the phenomenon to Lviv, a city in Ukraine. These videos date back to August 2021, thereby debunking the claim that the footage depicts a recent weather event over Gurugram, Haryana, or the Delhi NCR region.

‍

‍

‍

Further research revealed that a Ukrainian news channel named  24 Kanal, had reported on the Lviv thundercloud phenomenon in August 2021. The report was published under the headline “Lviv Covered by Unique Thundercloud: Amazing Video” ( original in Russian, translated into English). 

‍

‍

‍

Conclusion:

‍

The viral video does not depict a recent weather event in Gurugram or Delhi NCR, but rather an old incident from Lviv, Ukraine, recorded in August 2021. Verified sources, including Ukrainian media coverage, confirm this. Hence, the circulating claim is misleading and false. 

‍

• Claim: Old Thundercloud Video from Lviv city in Ukraine Ukraine (2021) Falsely Linked to Delhi NCR, Gurugram and Haryana.
• Claimed On: Social Media
• Fact Check: False and Misleading.

I. The Principles Laid Down

In addition to commemorating twenty years of an unexpected alliance, the leaders of eleven countries gathered in Bharat Mandapam this September for the 18th BRICS Summit in an effort to codify a worldview. The 140-point New Delhi Declaration, which was unanimously adopted on September 12, 2026, with the theme "Building for Resilience, Innovation, Cooperation and Sustainability," is based on a few enduring principles: respect for one another, sovereign equality, solidarity, democracy, openness, inclusivity, cooperation, and consensus.

Although these terms are not new to the BRICS lexicon, their emphasis this year felt very deliberate. Through the BRICS Leaders' Statement on the Global Governance of Artificial Intelligence, the Declaration formally incorporated artificial intelligence into its agenda, pushed for fair geographic representation in the UN Secretariat and other multilateral organisations, and demanded a realignment of shareholding at international financial institutions to address the historical under-representation of the Global South. It called for compatible international standards on supply-chain security and addressed ICT security, cybercrime, data protection, and the growing threat of deepfakes and disinformation. Leaders highlighted the condemnation of terrorism, particularly the Pahalgam incident, as a collective zero-tolerance position. Taken together, these are not merely diplomatic courtesies,  they are the scaffolding of an alternative vision for how a multipolar world might govern itself.

II. The Conversation That Followed

No declaration of this scale escapes scrutiny, and the days following the summit produced a spirited, occasionally sceptical, conversation among policy circles, economists and diplomats. Commentators were quick to note what the Declaration deliberately avoided: it named no country on the more combustible geopolitical fault lines, choosing studied ambiguity over confrontation, even as it acknowledged simmering tensions in West Asia. This restraint was itself read as a signal, that a bloc as internally diverse as Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the UAE can only move forward on the strength of what unites it, not what divides it.

Analysts also debated the substance behind the rhetoric of de-dollarisation and financial reform, questioning whether a bloc still negotiating its own internal consensus on trade and currency mechanisms could realistically reshape institutions built over eight decades. Others, more sympathetic to the Global South's grievances, argued that the very act of convening over four hundred meetings across thirty Indian cities,  bringing together ministers, parliamentarians, technocrats, businesses and citizens,  was itself a form of institution-building, patient and unglamorous, but far more durable than a single communiqué. The debate, in essence, was not about whether BRICS had said the right things, but whether saying them, repeatedly and jointly, could eventually translate into structural change.

III. India's Outlook

For India, the Summit was less an isolated diplomatic event than the culmination of a year-long chairship built around a deliberate proposition: that representation without capacity is hollow, and that political voice must be matched by economic and institutional readiness. This is the thread that ran through India's engagement, from its insistence on resilient and diversified supply chains, to its championing of the Global South's right to a genuine seat at the table, not merely a symbolic one.

India used the platform to advance an agenda that was pragmatic rather than purely aspirational,  referencing its own hosting of the AI Impact Summit earlier in the year, pushing for common standards on cybersecurity and data governance, and positioning itself as a credible bridge between the ambitions of emerging economies and the operational discipline needed to realise them. The message India sent, deliberately or otherwise, was one of quiet confidence: that a nation navigating its own extraordinary digital transformation,  from public digital infrastructure to an expanding AI ecosystem  has both the standing and the responsibility to help shape the norms that will govern technology, trade and trust for the rest of the developing world.

IV. The Message and the Road Ahead

The abiding message of the New Delhi Declaration, stripped of its diplomatic phrasing, is this: the architecture of global governance was built for a world that no longer exists, and the countries most affected by that mismatch intend to keep saying so, together, and increasingly, on their own terms. Whether that translates into reformed institutions or remains an evolving conversation will depend on follow-through, not further declarations.

Speaking to the significance of this moment, Major Vineet Kumar, Founder and Global President of CyberPeace, observed that "India today sits at the forefront of a generational shift, not just in economic growth, but in shaping the digital trust and cyber-resilience frameworks that the rest of the Global South will look to for years to come." It is a fitting note to close on, because the road ahead for BRICS, and for India within it, will likely be won or lost not in the language of declarations, but in the quieter work of building institutions, standards and trust that outlast any single summit.

If the last two decades of BRICS were about proving that such a coalition could exist at all, the next chapter, anchored, for now, by India's own trajectory,  will be about proving that it can build something durable: resilient supply chains, credible AI governance, safer digital ecosystems, and institutions genuinely reflective of a multipolar world. The principles have been laid down. What follows will define whether they were a moment, or a movement.


References

- Prime Minister of India, Government of India. BRICS New Delhi Declaration: Building for Resilience, Innovation, Cooperation and Sustainability (September 12, 2026). pmindia.gov.in
- Forbes India. BRICS Summit 2026: 11 Key Takeaways From the New Delhi Declaration. forbesindia.com
- The Statesman. BRICS Summit 2026: Here is what the New Delhi Declaration says. thestatesman.com
- Tribune India. India to host BRICS Summit in 2026; forum collectively condemns Pahalgam terror attack, calls for zero tolerance: Om Birla.tribuneindia.com
- ummid.com News Network. BRICS Declaration 2026: Full Text.* ummid.com
- PIB India (Press Information Bureau, via Substack). BRICS 2026: From Representation to Partnership. pibindia.substack.com
- BRICS Expert Council (Russia). Kumar, Vineet. CyberPeace, BRICS, and a New Framework for Digital Trust. bricscouncil.ru

‍

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/

‍