#FactCheck: Viral video of Unrest in Kenya is being falsely linked with J&K
Executive Summary:
A video of people throwing rocks at vehicles is being shared widely on social media, claiming an incident of unrest in Jammu and Kashmir, India. However, our thorough research has revealed that the video is not from India, but from a protest in Kenya on 25 June 2025. Therefore, the video is misattributed and shared out of context to promote false information.
Claim:
The viral video shows people hurling stones at army or police vehicles and is claimed to be from Jammu and Kashmir, implying ongoing unrest and anti-government sentiment in the region.
Fact Check:
To verify the validity of the viral statement, we did a reverse image search by taking key frames from the video. The results clearly demonstrated that the video was not sourced from Jammu and Kashmir as claimed, but rather it was consistent with footage from Nairobi, Kenya, where a significant protest took place on 25 June 2025. Protesters in Kenya had congregated to express their outrage against police brutality and government action, which ultimately led to violent clashes with police.
We also came across a YouTube video with similar news and frames. The protests were part of a broader anti-government movement to mark its one-year time period.
To support the context, we did a keyword search of any mob violence or recent unrest in J&K on a reputable Indian news source, But our search did not turn up any mention of protests or similar events in J&K around the relevant time. Based on this evidence, it is clear that the video has been intentionally misrepresented and is being circulated with false context to mislead viewers.
Conclusion:
The assertion that the viral video shows a protest in Jammu and Kashmir is incorrect. The video appears to be taken from a protest in Nairobi, Kenya, in June 2025. Labeling the video incorrectly only serves to spread misinformation and stir up uncalled for political emotions. Always be sure to verify where content is sourced from before you believe it or share it.
- Claim: Army faces heavy resistance from Kashmiri youth — the valley is in chaos.
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Related Blogs
Introduction
In an era when misinformation spreads like wildfire across the digital landscape, the need for effective strategies to counteract these challenges has grown exponentially in a very short period. Prebunking and Debunking are two approaches for countering the growing spread of misinformation online. Prebunking empowers individuals by teaching them to discern between true and false information and acts as a protective layer that comes into play even before people encounter malicious content. Debunking is the correction of false or misleading claims after exposure, aiming to undo or reverse the effects of a particular piece of misinformation. Debunking includes methods such as fact-checking, algorithmic correction on a platform, social correction by an individual or group of online peers, or fact-checking reports by expert organisations or journalists. An integrated approach which involves both strategies can be effective in countering the rapid spread of misinformation online.
Brief Analysis of Prebunking
Prebunking is a proactive practice that seeks to rebut erroneous information before it spreads. The goal is to train people to critically analyse information and develop ‘cognitive immunity’ so that they are less likely to be misled when they do encounter misinformation.
The Prebunking approach, grounded in Inoculation theory, teaches people to recognise, analyse and avoid manipulation and misleading content so that they build resilience against the same. Inoculation theory, a social psychology framework, suggests that pre-emptively conferring psychological resistance against malicious persuasion attempts can reduce susceptibility to misinformation across cultures. As the term suggests, the MO is to help the mind in the present develop resistance to influence that it may encounter in the future. Just as medical vaccines or inoculations help the body build resistance to future infections by administering weakened doses of the harm agent, inoculation theory seeks to teach people fact from fiction through exposure to examples of weak, dichotomous arguments, manipulation tactics like emotionally charged language, case studies that draw parallels between truths and distortions, and so on. In showing people the difference, inoculation theory teaches them to be on the lookout for misinformation and manipulation even, or especially, when they least expect it.
The core difference between Prebunking and Debunking is that while the former is preventative and seeks to provide a broad-spectrum cover against misinformation, the latter is reactive and focuses on specific instances of misinformation. While Debunking is closely tied to fact-checking, Prebunking is tied to a wider range of specific interventions, some of which increase motivation to be vigilant against misinformation and others increase the ability to engage in vigilance with success.
There is much to be said in favour of the Prebunking approach because these interventions build the capacity to identify misinformation and recognise red flags However, their success in practice may vary. It might be difficult to scale up Prebunking efforts and ensure their reach to a larger audience. Sustainability is critical in ensuring that Prebunking measures maintain their impact over time. Continuous reinforcement and reminders may be required to ensure that individuals retain the skills and information they gained from the Prebunking training activities. Misinformation tactics and strategies are always evolving, so it is critical that Prebunking interventions are also flexible and agile and respond promptly to developing challenges. This may be easier said than done, but with new misinformation and cyber threats developing frequently, it is a challenge that has to be addressed for Prebunking to be a successful long-term solution.
Encouraging people to be actively cautious while interacting with information, acquire critical thinking abilities, and reject the effect of misinformation requires a significant behavioural change over a relatively short period of time. Overcoming ingrained habits and prejudices, and countering a natural reluctance to change is no mean feat. Developing a widespread culture of information literacy requires years of social conditioning and unlearning and may pose a significant challenge to the effectiveness of Prebunking interventions.
Brief Analysis of Debunking
Debunking is a technique for identifying and informing people that certain news items or information are incorrect or misleading. It seeks to lessen the impact of misinformation that has already spread. The most popular kind of Debunking occurs through collaboration between fact-checking organisations and social media businesses. Journalists or other fact-checkers discover inaccurate or misleading material, and social media platforms flag or label it. Debunking is an important strategy for curtailing the spread of misinformation and promoting accuracy in the digital information ecosystem.
Debunking interventions are crucial in combating misinformation. However, there are certain challenges associated with the same. Debunking misinformation entails critically verifying facts and promoting corrected information. However, this is difficult owing to the rising complexity of modern tools used to generate narratives that combine truth and untruth, views and facts. These advanced approaches, which include emotional spectrum elements, deepfakes, audiovisual material, and pervasive trolling, necessitate a sophisticated reaction at all levels: technological, organisational, and cultural.
Furthermore, It is impossible to debunk all misinformation at any given time, which effectively means that it is impossible to protect everyone at all times, which means that at least some innocent netizens will fall victim to manipulation despite our best efforts. Debunking is inherently reactive in nature, addressing misinformation after it has grown extensively. This reactionary method may be less successful than proactive strategies such as Prebunking from the perspective of total harm done. Misinformation producers operate swiftly and unexpectedly, making it difficult for fact-checkers to keep up with the rapid dissemination of erroneous or misleading information. Debunking may need continuous exposure to fact-check to prevent erroneous beliefs from forming, implying that a single Debunking may not be enough to rectify misinformation. Debunking requires time and resources, and it is not possible to disprove every piece of misinformation that circulates at any particular moment. This constraint may cause certain misinformation to go unchecked, perhaps leading to unexpected effects. The misinformation on social media can be quickly spread and may become viral faster than Debunking pieces or articles. This leads to a situation in which misinformation spreads like a virus, while the antidote to debunked facts struggles to catch up.
Prebunking vs Debunking: Comparative Analysis
Prebunking interventions seek to educate people to recognise and reject misinformation before they are exposed to actual manipulation. Prebunking offers tactics for critical examination, lessening the individuals' susceptibility to misinformation in a variety of contexts. On the other hand, Debunking interventions involve correcting specific false claims after they have been circulated. While Debunking can address individual instances of misinformation, its impact on reducing overall reliance on misinformation may be limited by the reactive nature of the approach.
.png)
CyberPeace Policy Recommendations for Tech/Social Media Platforms
With the rising threat of online misinformation, tech/social media platforms can adopt an integrated strategy that includes both Prebunking and Debunking initiatives to be deployed and supported on all platforms to empower users to recognise the manipulative messaging through Prebunking and be aware of the accuracy of misinformation through Debunking interventions.
- Gamified Inoculation: Tech/social media companies can encourage gamified inoculation campaigns, which is a competence-oriented approach to Prebunking misinformation. This can be effective in helping people immunise the receiver against subsequent exposures. It can empower people to build competencies to detect misinformation through gamified interventions.
- Promotion of Prebunking and Debunking Campaigns through Algorithm Mechanisms: Tech/social media platforms may promote and guarantee that algorithms prioritise the distribution of Prebunking materials to users, boosting educational content that strengthens resistance to misinformation. Platform operators should incorporate algorithms that prioritise the visibility of Debunking content in order to combat the spread of erroneous information and deliver proper corrections; this can eventually address and aid in Prebunking and Debunking methods to reach a bigger or targeted audience.
- User Empowerment to Counter Misinformation: Tech/social media platforms can design user-friendly interfaces that allow people to access Prebunking materials, quizzes, and instructional information to help them improve their critical thinking abilities. Furthermore, they can incorporate simple reporting tools for flagging misinformation, as well as links to fact-checking resources and corrections.
- Partnership with Fact-Checking/Expert Organizations: Tech/social media platforms can facilitate Prebunking and Debunking initiatives/campaigns by collaborating with fact-checking/expert organisations and promoting such initiatives at a larger scale and ultimately fighting misinformation with joint hands initiatives.
Conclusion
The threat of online misinformation is only growing with every passing day and so, deploying effective countermeasures is essential. Prebunking and Debunking are the two such interventions. To sum up: Prebunking interventions try to increase resilience to misinformation, proactively lowering susceptibility to erroneous or misleading information and addressing broader patterns of misinformation consumption, while Debunking is effective in correcting a particular piece of misinformation and having a targeted impact on belief in individual false claims. An integrated approach involving both the methods and joint initiatives by tech/social media platforms and expert organizations can ultimately help in fighting the rising tide of online misinformation and establishing a resilient online information landscape.
References
- https://mark-hurlstone.github.io/THKE.22.BJP.pdf
- https://futurefreespeech.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Empowering-Audiences-Through-%E2%80%98Prebunking-Michael-Bang-Petersen-Background-Report_formatted.pdf
- https://newsreel.pte.hu/news/unprecedented_challenges_Debunking_disinformation
- https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/global-vaccination-badnews/
Executive Summary
A photo of Bollywood actress Kareena Kapoor Khan is being widely shared on social media with the claim that she is pregnant again. In the viral image, Kareena appears with a visible baby bump, leading users to speculate about another pregnancy. However, research by the CyberPeace Research Wing found the claim to be misleading. The research revealed that the image is not recent and is actually from 2020, now being reshared with a false narrative.
Claim:
An Instagram user shared the viral image on April 18, 2026, and posted a caption jokingly suggesting that after Taimur and Jehangir, Kareena was expecting more children.
Fact Check:
To verify the claim, relevant keyword searches were conducted online, but no credible media report was found supporting the claim that Kareena Kapoor Khan is currently pregnant. A reverse search of the viral visual led to an older video uploaded on the YouTube channel Bol Bollywood on December 7, 2020, where the same image was used.
Further research also found a similar video report on the YouTube channel Bollywood Bluff, published on December 8, 2020, featuring the same visual and similar claims. These findings confirmed that the viral image is several years old and unrelated to any recent development.
Conclusion:
The claim that Kareena Kapoor Khan is pregnant again is misleading. The viral photo is not recent but an old image from 2020 that is being circulated with a false claim.
Executive Summary
A video is being shared on social media showing a railway station completely submerged in water. The video is being shared with the claim that it shows Chapra Railway Station in Bihar, where severe waterlogging occurred following heavy rainfall. The water level in the video appears so high that even the platforms are not visible. A research done by the Research Wing of the CyberPeace found the viral claim to be false. Our research revealed that the viral video is AI-generated and is being shared on social media with a misleading claim.
Claim:
A user on the social media platform Facebook shared the viral video on August 31, 2026, claiming that Chapra Railway Station had been inundated. The link to the post, archived link, and screenshots are provided below.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1393870102719178
Fact Check
To debunk the viral claim, we searched Google using relevant keywords. However, we could not find any credible media reports confirming the claim. As the next step in our research, we also checked the status of trains arriving at and departing from Chapra Railway Station. We reasoned that if the station had actually been submerged to the extent shown in the video, rail operations would likely have been disrupted and some trains might have been cancelled. However, our research found no information about any train operating from Chapra being cancelled.
Upon closely examining the viral video, we suspected that it might be AI-generated. We subsequently scanned the video using the AI detection tool Hive Moderation. According to the tool’s results, the viral video was found to be 99 percent AI-generated.
As part of the next step of our research, we scanned the viral video using another AI detection tool, Wasitai AI. According to the tool’s results, the viral video is AI-generated.
Conclusion
Our research found that the viral video is AI-generated and is being shared on social media with a misleading claim.
