#FactCheck: Edited Broadcast Misused to Spread False Assam Political Rift Claim
Executive Summary:
A video from an India TV news show related to the Assam elections is going viral on social media. In the clip, anchor Meenakshi Joshi is allegedly seen claiming that there is a rift between the BJP and the RSS in Assam. The video further suggests that RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat wrote a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi stating that former Congress members have taken over the BJP, and that RSS volunteers would not work for the party in Assam. However, a research by the CyberPeace found that the viral video is edited and misleading. The original video contains no such claims.
Claim:
A social media user Ajit Singh shared the video on X with the caption:“The core idea of today’s BJP is to capture power by any means. We have been saying this for long, and now even RSS has accepted that BJP in Assam has been taken over by Congress mindset.”
Fact Check:
To verify the claim, we searched relevant keywords about the alleged letter by RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat to Prime Minister Narendra Modi. However, we found no credible media reports supporting this claim. We then checked the YouTube channel of India TV but could not find the viral clip there. During the search, we did find a similar video from Meenakshi Joshi’s show. In the beginning of that video, the portion seen in the viral clip appears.
In the original video, the anchor is discussing the announcement of election dates in five states. There is no mention of any rift between the BJP and RSS in Assam.
Conclusion:
The viral India TV video claiming a rift between the BJP and RSS in Assam is edited and misleading. The original broadcast was about election dates in five states and did not include any such claims.
Related Blogs
Executive Summary:
In the context of the recent earthquake in Taiwan, a video has gone viral and is being spread on social media claiming that the video was taken during the recent earthquake that occurred in Taiwan. However, fact checking reveals it to be an old video. The video is from September 2022, when Taiwan had another earthquake of magnitude 7.2. It is clear that the reversed image search and comparison with old videos has established the fact that the viral video is from the 2022 earthquake and not the recent 2024-event. Several news outlets had covered the 2022 incident, mentioning additional confirmation of the video's origin.
Claims:
There is a news circulating on social media about the earthquake in Taiwan and Japan recently. There is a post on “X” stating that,
“BREAKING NEWS :
Horrific #earthquake of 7.4 magnitude hit #Taiwan and #Japan. There is an alert that #Tsunami might hit them soon”.
Similar Posts:
Fact Check:
We started our investigation by watching the videos thoroughly. We divided the video into frames. Subsequently, we performed reverse search on the images and it took us to an X (formally Twitter) post where a user posted the same viral video on Sept 18, 2022. Worth to notice, the post has the caption-
“#Tsunami warnings issued after Taiwan quake. #Taiwan #Earthquake #TaiwanEarthquake”
The same viral video was posted on several news media in September 2022.
The viral video was also shared on September 18, 2022 on NDTV News channel as shown below.
Conclusion:
To conclude, the viral video that claims to depict the 2024 Taiwan earthquake was from September 2022. In the course of the rigorous inspection of the old proof and the new evidence, it has become clear that the video does not refer to the recent earthquake that took place as stated. Hence, the recent viral video is misleading . It is important to validate the information before sharing it on social media to prevent the spread of misinformation.
Claim: Video circulating on social media captures the recent 2024 earthquake in Taiwan.
Claimed on: X, Facebook, YouTube
Fact Check: Fake & Misleading, the video actually refers to an incident from 2022.
Introduction
Given the era of digital trust and technological innovation, the age of artificial intelligence has provided a new dimension to how people communicate and how they create and consume content. However, like all borrowed powers, the misuse of AI can lead to terrible consequences. One recent dark example was a cybercrime in Brazil: a sophisticated online scam using deepfake technology to impersonate celebrities of global stature, including supermodel Gisele Bündchen, in misleading Instagram ads. Luring in millions of reais in revenue, this crime clearly brings forth the concern of AI-generative content having rightfully set on the side of criminals.
Scam in Motion
Lately, the federal police of Brazil have stated that this scheme has been in circulation since 2024, when the ads were already being touted as apparently very genuine, using AI-generated video and images. The ads showed Gisele Bündchen and other celebrities endorsing skincare products, promotional giveaways, or time-limited discounts. The victims were tricked into making petty payments, mostly under 100 reais (about $19) for these fake products or were lured into paying "shipping costs" for prizes that never actually arrived.
The criminals leveraged their approach by scaling it up and focusing on minor losses accumulated from every victim, thus christening it "statistical immunity" by investigators. Victims being pocketed only a couple of dollars made most of them stay on their heels in terms of filing a complaint, thereby allowing these crooks extra limbs to shove on. Over time, authorities estimated that the group had gathered over 20 million reais ($3.9 million) in this elaborate con.
The scam was detected when a victim came forth with the information that an Instagram advertisement portraying a deepfake video of Gisele Bündchen was indeed false. With Anna looking to be Gisele and on the recommendation of a skincare company, the deepfake video was the most well-produced fake video. On going further into the matter, it became apparent that the investigations uncovered a whole network of deceptive social media pages, payment gateways, and laundering channels spread over five states in Brazil.
The Role of AI and Deepfakes in Modern Fraud
It is one of the first few large-scale cases in Brazil where AI-generated deepfakes have been used to perpetrate financial fraud. Deepfake technology, aided by machine learning algorithms, can realistically mimic human appearance and speech and has become increasingly accessible and sophisticated. Whereas before a level of expertise and computer resources were needed, one now only requires an online tool or app.
With criminals gaining a psychological advantage through deepfakes, the audiences would be more willing to accept the ad as being genuine as they saw a familiar and trusted face, a celebrity known for integrity and success. The human brain is wired to trust certain visual cues, making deepfakes an exploitation of this cognitive bias. Unlike phishing emails brimming with spelling and grammatical errors, deepfake videos are immersive, emotional, and visually convincing.
This is the growing terrain: AI-enabled misinformation. From financial scams to political propaganda, manipulated media is killing trust in the digital ecosystem.
Legalities and Platform Accountability
The Brazilian government had taken a proactive stance on the issue. In June 2025, the country's Supreme Court held that social media platforms could be held liable for failure to expeditiously remove criminal content, even in the absence of a formal order from a court. The icing on the cake is that that judgment would go a long way in architecting platform accountability in Brazil and potentially worldwide as jurisdictions adopt processes to deal with AI-generated fraud.
Meta, the parent company of Instagram, had said its policies forbid "ads that deceptively use public figures to scam people." Meta claims to use advanced detection mechanisms, trained review teams, and user tools to report violations. The persistence of such scams shows that the enforcement mechanisms still lag the pace and scale of AI-based deception.
Why These Scams Succeed
There are many reasons for the success of these AI-powered scams.
- Trust Due to Familiarity: Human beings tend to believe anything put forth by a known individual.
- Micro-Fraud: Keeping the money laundered from victims small prevents any increase in the number of complaints about these crimes.
- Speed To Create Content: New ads are being generated by criminals faster than ads can be checked for and removed by platforms via AI tools.
- Cross-Platform Propagation: A deepfake ad is then reshared onto various other social networking platforms once it starts gaining some traction, thereby worsening the problem.
- Absence of Public Awareness: Most users still cannot discern manipulated media, especially when high-quality deepfakes come into play.
Wider Implications on Cybersecurity and Society
The Brazilian case is but a microcosm of a much bigger problem. With deepfake technology evolving, AI-generated deception threatens not only individuals but also institutions, markets, and democratic systems. From investment scams and fake charters to synthetic IDs for corporate fraud, the possibilities for abuse are endless.
Moreover, with generative AIs being adopted by cybercriminals, law enforcement faces obstructions to properly attributing, validating evidence, and conducting digital forensics. Determining what is actual and what is manipulated has now given rise to the need for a forensic AI model that has triggered the deployment of the opposite on the other side, the attacker, thus initiating a rising tech arms race between the two parties.
Protecting Citizens from AI-Powered Scams
Public awareness has remained the best defence for people in such scams. Gisele Bündchen's squad encouraged members of the public to verify any advertisement through official brand or celebrity channels before engaging with said advertisements. Consumers need to be wary of offers that appear "too good to be true" and double-check the URL for authenticity before sharing any kind of personal information
Individually though, just a few acts go so far in lessening some of the risk factors:
- Verify an advertisement's origin before clicking or sharing it
- Never share any monetary or sensitive personal information through an unverifiable link
- Enable two-factor authentication on all your social accounts
- Periodically check transaction history for any unusual activity
- Report any deepfake or fraudulent advertisement immediately to the platform or cybercrime authorities
Collaboration will be the way ahead for governments and technology companies. Investing in AI-based detection systems, cooperating on international law enforcement, and building capacity for digital literacy programs will enable us to stem this rising tide of synthetic media scams.
Conclusion
The deepfake case in Brazil with Gisele Bündchen acts as a clarion for citizens and legislators alike. This shows the evolution of cybercrime that profited off the very AI technologies that were once hailed for innovation and creativity. In this new digital frontier that society is now embracing, authenticity stands closer to manipulation, disappearing faster with each dawn.
While keeping public safety will certainly still require great cybersecurity measures in this new environment, it will demand equal contributions on vigilance, awareness, and ethical responsibility. Deepfakes are not only a technology problem but a societal one-crossing into global cooperation, media literacy, and accountability at every level throughout the entire digital ecosystem.
Introduction
The rapid adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) tools and applications in companies has been largely presented as a groundbreaking development for enterprises. The potential for increased productivity and efficiently scaled companies eliminates repetitive tasks and builds a narrative that practically writes itself for executives. What has largely been ignored, however, is its effect on its users- the employees. Evidence from across the United States, United Kingdom, and continental Europe indicates an increase in psychological disengagement from work, along with an increase in the number of people who are actively sabotaging the very systems that companies have invested millions of dollars to implement, as a direct result of being forced to work with AI.
The Backdrop: Quiet Quitting
Quiet quitting is a form of employee disengagement wherein workers meet only the basic expectations of their job without. Gallup puts global employee engagement at just 21%. State of the Global Workplace 2026 report which analysed employee well-being across 160 countries reports that in India, employee and manager engagement has declined. Around 62% of workers describe themselves as not engaged, and another 17% are actively disengaged — not just drifting, but potentially pulling in the opposite direction. What does this mean for productivity? Gallup estimates this costs the global economy roughly $8.9 trillion in lost productivity each year, around 9% of world GDP. This is the workplace AI has entered into.
How AI Is Changing the Nature of Work
The promise was simpler work but employees report that the reality is often more of it. AI raises output expectations without necessarily reducing effort. Workers now lose the equivalent of 51 working days per year to technology friction, nearly two full months up 42% from 2025. Poorly integrated systems force employees to spend hours troubleshooting or correcting AI-generated outputs, adding cognitive load rather than removing it. Focus efficiency dropped to a three-year low of 60%, as collaboration time surged 34% and multitasking climbed 12%. AI is not eliminating work. It is transforming it into something more demanding and more fragmented. The psychological dimension is equally documented. TalentLMS research found that 54% of employees report persistent workplace unhappiness, with one in five experiencing it frequently or constantly. 29% report unmanageable workloads during this transition, and 15% do not clearly understand their role expectations in an AI-transformed workplace. When workers cannot see where they fit, withdrawal is a rational response.
Then there is the fear. IBM announced it would not replace roughly 7,800 back-office positions that could be handled by AI, framing it as natural attrition. Klarna said its AI assistant was doing the work of 700 full-time customer service agents. Dropbox laid off 16% of its workforce, with its CEO explicitly citing the need to “make room for AI.” AI was the leading cause of job cuts in March 2026 the first time that has happened since tracking began.
The Causal Link: AI Anxiety to Quiet Quitting
A peer-reviewed study published in March 2025 establishes the causal mechanism between forced AI adoption and employee disengagement. Conducted across 457 employees in Turkish SMEs, it found that AI anxiety does not directly compel people to resign. Instead, it triggers quiet quitting a form of progressive disengagement that functions as a precursor to departure. Drawing on Withdrawal Progression Theory, the study frames quiet quitting as a preliminary stage of turnover intention, where withdrawal progresses from mild detachment toward eventual exit. The integrated causal chain runs as follows: forced AI adoption creates work intensification and job anxiety, which produce burnout and loss of autonomy, which trigger psychological withdrawal, which precedes turnover. DHR Global’s Workforce Trends Report for 2026 found that overall employee engagement dropped from 88% to 64% in a single year. Crucially, 69% of C-suite leaders say their company has communicated clearly about AI’s impact on jobs but only 12% of entry-level staff agree. When the people most exposed to displacement are also the least informed about what is happening to their roles, disengagement is not a mystery. It is a response to a vacuum of information.
From Disengagement to Active Withdrawal
Quiet quitting is then a natural response. But what has emerged alongside it is something more active, and it is where the disengagement crisis tips into something organisations are unprepared for. The Writer and Workplace Intelligence survey of 2,400 knowledge workers found that 29% of employees admit to willfully withdrawing from their company’s AI strategy. Among Gen Z workers, that figure jumps to 44%. Active withdrawal takes several forms: entering proprietary data into public AI chatbots, using unapproved tools, outright refusing to engage with mandated platforms, and in some cases deliberately generating low-quality outputs to make the technology look ineffective. For Gen Z, the resistance has a structural logic. Junior roles in finance, law, and tech the traditional “learning by doing” rungs of the career ladder have declined by 32% since 2022. For a 22-year-old, AI is not a tool; it is a competitor that has already taken their first job. Workers who resist AI out of fear for their jobs are making themselves more vulnerable to the outcome they dread. 77% of executives say employees who refuse to become proficient in AI will not be considered for promotions or leadership roles, and 60% are considering cutting those who refuse to adopt it entirely.
Meanwhile, 75% of executives admit their company’s AI strategy is “more for show” than a meaningful guide to outcomes. Only 29% report significant ROI from generative AI, despite 97% claiming to have already deployed agents across their organisation. 39% of business leaders admit they made employees redundant as a result of deploying AI of whom 55% concede they made the wrong decisions about those redundancies. Organisations are moving fast, getting it wrong, and the cost is being absorbed by the workforce.
Conclusion
AI is not directly causing quiet quitting. However, AI is changing how we view working relationships; it will continue to result in predictable outcomes of poor execution of AI (i.e. passive to active disengagement) and radically change the way that we work, primarily by creating an increase in job demands, reducing autonomy, and raising worker anxiety without providing any transparency about future AI technology use. If AI continues to create a challenging work environment, it may lead to increased psychological detachment from work and ultimately result in productivity losses, possibly canceling out the very gains expected from AI integration. This globally rising disengagement from AI tools begets the question: is technology being deployed responsibly?
References
- https://www.gallup.com/workplace/349484/state-of-the-global-workplace.aspx
- https://www.walkme.com/news-releases/enterprises-lose-51-workdays-per-employee-to-technology-friction-annually-despite-record-ai-investment-walkme-global-study-of-3750-finds/.
- https://www.activtrak.com/resources/state-of-the-workplace/
- https://peoplemanagingpeople.com/employee-retention/quiet-cracking/
- https://www.webpronews.com/the-quiet-revolt-gen-z-workers-are-deliberately-undermining-ai-deployments-from-the-inside/
- https://www.uctoday.com/productivity-automation/44-of-gen-z-workers-are-sabotaging-your-enterprise-ai-rollout-the-problem-isnt-gen-z/
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11939379/
- https://huntscanlon.com/workforce-trends-2026-leaders-confront-burnout-disengagement-and-ai-driven-change/
- https://fortune.com/2026/04/08/gen-z-workers-sabotage-ai-rollout-backlash/
- https://peoplemanagingpeople.com/employee-retention/quiet-cracking/
- https://www.hrgrapevine.com/us/content/article/2026-04-09-ai-adoption-is-tearing-companies-apart-says-new-report
- https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/new-updates/india-leads-in-workplace-disengagement-as-quiet-quitting-trend-rises-why-are-indians-mentally-checking-out-at-jobs/articleshow/130104773.cms?from=mdr
