#FactCheck - AI-Generated Video Falsely Linked to Protests in Iran
Amid protests against rising inflation in Iran, a video is being widely shared on social media showing people gathering on streets at night while using mobile phone flashlights. The video is being circulated with the claim that it shows recent protests in Iran. Cyber Peace Foundation’s research found that the video being shared as visuals from the ongoing protests in Iran is not real. Our investigation revealed that the viral video is AI-generated and has no connection with actual events on the ground.
Claim
On January 11, 2026, an Instagram user shared the video with a caption written in Spanish. The Hindi translation of the caption reads: “The Iranian government shut down the lights of protesters, but that did not stop them from remaining on the streets demanding that the Ayatollahs step down from power.”The post link, its archived version, and screenshots can be seen below: https://www.instagram.com/p/DTXqzayjqFz/
FactCheck:
To verify the claim, we extracted keyframes from the viral video and conducted a Google reverse image search.During this process, we found the same video uploaded on Instagram on January 11, 2026. In that post, the user explicitly stated that the video was created using AI. The caption reads that the streetlights were turned off to hide the scale of protesters, but people used their phone lights to show their presence, adding:
“I created this video using AI, inspired by tonight’s protests (January 10, 2026) in Tehran, Iran.” Link to the post and screenshot can be seen below: https://www.instagram.com/p/DTWXsHajNvl/
To further verify the authenticity of the video, we scanned it using multiple AI detection tools.Hive Moderation flagged the video as 97 percent AI-generated.
We also scanned the video using another AI detection tool, Wasitai, which likewise identified the video as AI-generated.
Conclusion
Our investigation confirms that the video being shared as footage from protests in Iran is not real. The viral video has been created using artificial intelligence and is being falsely linked to the ongoing protests. The claim circulating on social media is false and misleading.
Related Blogs
Executive Summary
Even after the conclusion of the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar, several misleading claims related to the demonstration continue to circulate on social media. During the protests, multiple AI-generated videos, deepfakes and fabricated narratives were circulated with the intention of misleading users. CyberPeace Research Wing’s Fact Check Team investigated several such viral claims and found that many of the videos were digitally manipulated or created using artificial intelligence (AI). The research revealed that fake audio, misleading captions and altered visuals were used to falsely attribute statements to public figures, including police officials, military officers and Union ministers. The following are four major false claims debunked by the CyberPeace Research Wing:
Claim 1: Delhi Police DCP Sumit Jha resigned from IPS in support of student protests
A video of Delhi Police DCP Sumit Jha was widely shared on social media with the claim that he resigned from the Indian Police Service (IPS) in support of the student movement at Jantar Mantar. In the viral video, DCP Sumit Jha is allegedly heard saying that he was resigning from his post with immediate effect and could not remain part of a system that forced him to spread false information against students. The video was shared with the claim that Delhi Police DCP Sumit Jha resigned from his position to support protesting students.
Claim
An Instagram user shared the viral video on July 28, 2026, claiming that Delhi Police DCP Sumit Jha had resigned from his post in support of protesting students.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DbUr6CPoB13/
Fact Check
CyberPeace Research Wing’s research found the claim to be false. The research revealed that DCP Sumit Jha has not resigned from his position. The viral video was digitally manipulated by adding AI-generated audio to an original video shared by the Delhi Police on its official X account on July 23, 2026.
The video was further analysed using the AI detection tool HIVE Moderation. The tool’s analysis indicated that the audio used in the viral video had a 91.8 per cent probability of being AI-generated, confirming that the audio was artificially created and was not authentic.
Claim 2: CDS Raja Subramani confirmed that more than 30,000 soldiers resigned over Jantar Mantar protests
A video featuring Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General Raja Subramani was widely circulated on social media with the false claim that he confirmed the resignation of more than 30,000 Indian Army personnel following the Jantar Mantar protest. The viral video claimed that soldiers had refused to serve the government after police action against protesting students.
Claim
A Facebook user shared the video claiming: "After the protests at Jantar Mantar, India’s Chief of Defence Staff Raja Subramani has issued an emergency alert, saying that more than 30,000 soldiers have resigned in protest because their children were brutally beaten at Jantar Mantar."
Fact Check
CyberPeace Research Wing’s research found the claim to be false. The research revealed that the video featuring CDS Raja Subramani was digitally manipulated using AI-generated audio. The original video did not contain any statement related to soldiers resigning or the Jantar Mantar protest. Further research led us to the same video posted by the Instagram account myyouthindia, where CDS Raja Subramani can be seen extending his best wishes to teams participating in the 135th Indian Oil Durand Cup Football Tournament. https://www.instagram.com/reels/DbEGRGBsKv8/
The audio circulating with the viral video was falsely added to create a misleading narrative.
Claim 3: Defence Minister Rajnath Singh warned protesters of strict action
A video featuring Union Defence Minister Rajnath Singh was widely circulated on social media with the claim that he issued a strict warning against student protesters. In the viral clip, Singh was allegedly heard saying that the government would not tolerate “anarchy” and that strict action would be taken against those blocking roads, disturbing public order or damaging government property.
Claim
An X user (@ForumDefence) shared the video on July 22, 2026, claiming that Rajnath Singh had issued a warning regarding the ongoing student protest.
Fact Check
CyberPeace Research Wing’s research found the claim to be false.The original video available on Rajnath Singh’s official YouTube channel was digitally altered by adding AI-generated audio. The statement heard in the viral video was not made by the Defence Minister and was created using artificial intelligence. The viral video was also analysed using the AI detection tool HIVE Moderation. The analysis indicated that the speech used in the video had an 88.1 per cent probability of being AI-generated.
Claim 4: Piyush Goyal threatened to hang CJP supporters
A video of Union Minister Piyush Goyal was shared on social media with the false claim that he threatened protesters and called for two to three CJP supporters to be hanged to "teach the rest of them a lesson." In the AI-manipulated video, Goyal was allegedly heard saying: "To teach the CJP a lesson, we should hang two to three of its supporters so that they understand the real power of the government."
https://x.com/HinduReformer/status/2080367073117790288?s=20
Fact Check
CyberPeace Research Wing’s research found that the viral video was digitally manipulated using AI-generated audio. The original video, posted on the Press Trust of India’s official X account, showed Piyush Goyal discussing the government’s response to examination paper leaks and appealing for the issue to be resolved through dialogue. He made no remarks threatening protesters or calling for the execution of CJP supporters.
The audio and statements attributed to him in the viral video were fabricated using AI technology.
Conclusion
CyberPeace Research Wing’s research found that all four viral claims related to the CJP protest were false. The videos circulating on social media were either digitally manipulated or created using AI-generated audio to falsely attribute statements to public officials. The research highlights how AI-generated deepfakes and manipulated content are increasingly being used to spread misinformation during sensitive events.
Introduction
Fundamentally, artificial intelligence (AI) is the greatest extension of human intelligence. It is the culmination of centuries of logic, reasoning, math, and creativity, machines trained to reflect cognition. However, such intelligence no longer resembles intelligence at all when it is put in the hands of the irresponsible, the one with malice, or the perverse, unleashed into the wild with minimal safeguards. Instead, distortion seems as a tool of debasement rather than enlightenment.
Recent incidents involving sexually explicit photographs created by AI on social media sites reveal an extremely unsettling reality. When intelligence is detached from accountability, morality, and governance, it corrodes society rather than elevates it. We are seeing a failure of stewardship rather than just a failure of technology.
The Cost of Unchecked Intelligence
The AI chatbot Grok, which operates under Elon Musk’s X (formerly Twitter), is the subject of a debate that goes beyond a single platform or product. The romanticisation of “unfiltered” knowledge and the perilous notion that innovation should come before accountability are signs of a bigger lapse in the digital ecosystem. We have allowed mechanisms that can be used as weapons against human dignity, especially the dignity of women and children, in the name of freedom.
We are no longer discussing artistic expression or experimental AI when a machine can digitally undress women, morph photos, or produce sexualised portrayals of kids with a few keystrokes. We stand in the face of algorithmic violence. Even if the physical touch is absent, the harm caused by it is genuine, long-lasting, and extremely personal.
The Regulatory Red Line
A major inflexion was reached when the Indian government responded by ordering a thorough technical, procedural, and governance-level audit. It acknowledges that AI systems are not isolated entities. Platforms that use them are not neutral pipes, but rather intermediaries with responsibilities. The Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, the IT Act, the IT Rules 2021, and the possible removal of Section 79 safe-harbour safeguards all make it quite evident that innovation is not automatic immunity.
However, the fundamental dilemma cannot be resolved by legislation alone. AI is hailed as a force multiplier for innovation, productivity, and advancement, but when incentives are biased towards engagement, virality, and shock value, its misuse shows how easily intelligence can turn into ugliness. The output receives greater attention the more provocative it is. Profit increases with attention. Restraint turns into a business disadvantage in this ecology.
The Aftermath
Grok’s own acknowledgement that “safeguard lapses” enabled the creation of pictures showing children wearing skimpy attire underscores a troubling reality, safety was not absent due to impossibility, but due to insufficiency. It was always possible to implement sophisticated filtering, more robust monitoring, and stricter oversight. They were simply not prioritised. When a system asserts that “no system is 100% foolproof,” it must also acknowledge that there is no acceptable margin of error when it comes to child protection.
The casual normalisation of such lapses is what is most troubling. By characterising these instances as “isolated cases,” systemic design decisions run the risk of being trivialised. In addition to intelligence, AI systems that have been taught on enormous amounts of human data also inherit bias, misogyny, and power imbalances.
Conclusion
What is required today is recalibration. Platforms need to shift from reactive compliance to proactive accountability. Safeguards must be incorporated at the architectural level; they cannot be cosmetic or post-facto. Governance must encompass enforced ethical boundaries in addition to terms of service. The idea that “edgy” AI is a sign of advancement must also be rejected by society.
Artificial Intelligence has never promised freedom under the guise of vulgarity. It was improvement, support, and augmentation. The fundamental core of intelligence is lost when it is used as a tool for degradation.So what’s left is a decision between principled innovation and unbridled novelty. Between responsibility and spectacle, between intelligence as purpose and intellect as power.
References
https://www.rediff.com/news/report/govt-orders-x-review-of-grok-over-explicit-content/20260103.htm
The World Economic Forum reported that AI-generated misinformation and disinformation are the second most likely threat to present a material crisis on a global scale in 2024 at 53% (Sept. 2023). Artificial intelligence is automating the creation of fake news at a rate disproportionate to its fact-checking. It is spurring an explosion of web content mimicking factual articles that instead disseminate false information about grave themes such as elections, wars and natural disasters.
According to a report by the Centre for the Study of Democratic Institutions, a Canadian think tank, the most prevalent effect of Generative AI is the ability to flood the information ecosystem with misleading and factually-incorrect content. As reported by Democracy Reporting International during the 2024 elections of the European Union, Google's Gemini, OpenAI’s ChatGPT 3.5 and 4.0, and Microsoft’s AI interface ‘CoPilot’ were inaccurate one-third of the time when engaged for any queries regarding the election data. Therefore, a need for an innovative regulatory approach like regulatory sandboxes which can address these challenges while encouraging responsible AI innovation is desired.
What Is AI-driven Misinformation?
False or misleading information created, amplified, or spread using artificial intelligence technologies is AI-driven misinformation. Machine learning models are leveraged to automate and scale the creation of false and deceptive content. Some examples are deep fakes, AI-generated news articles, and bots that amplify false narratives on social media.
The biggest challenge is in the detection and management of AI-driven misinformation. It is difficult to distinguish AI-generated content from authentic content, especially as these technologies advance rapidly.
AI-driven misinformation can influence elections, public health, and social stability by spreading false or misleading information. While public adoption of the technology has undoubtedly been rapid, it is yet to achieve true acceptance and actually fulfill its potential in a positive manner because there is widespread cynicism about the technology - and rightly so. The general public sentiment about AI is laced with concern and doubt regarding the technology’s trustworthiness, mainly due to the absence of a regulatory framework maturing on par with the technological development.
Regulatory Sandboxes: An Overview
Regulatory sandboxes refer to regulatory tools that allow businesses to test and experiment with innovative products, services or businesses under the supervision of a regulator for a limited period. They engage by creating a controlled environment where regulators allow businesses to test new technologies or business models with relaxed regulations.
Regulatory sandboxes have been in use for many industries and the most recent example is their use in sectors like fintech, such as the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority sandbox. These models have been known to encourage innovation while allowing regulators to understand emerging risks. Lessons from the fintech sector show that the benefits of regulatory sandboxes include facilitating firm financing and market entry and increasing speed-to-market by reducing administrative and transaction costs. For regulators, testing in sandboxes informs policy-making and regulatory processes. Looking at the success in the fintech industry, regulatory sandboxes could be adapted to AI, particularly for overseeing technologies that have the potential to generate or spread misinformation.
The Role of Regulatory Sandboxes in Addressing AI Misinformation
Regulatory sandboxes can be used to test AI tools designed to identify or flag misinformation without the risks associated with immediate, wide-scale implementation. Stakeholders like AI developers, social media platforms, and regulators work in collaboration within the sandbox to refine the detection algorithms and evaluate their effectiveness as content moderation tools.
These sandboxes can help balance the need for innovation in AI and the necessity of protecting the public from harmful misinformation. They allow the creation of a flexible and adaptive framework capable of evolving with technological advancements and fostering transparency between AI developers and regulators. This would lead to more informed policymaking and building public trust in AI applications.
CyberPeace Policy Recommendations
Regulatory sandboxes offer a mechanism to predict solutions that will help to regulate the misinformation that AI tech creates. Some policy recommendations are as follows:
- Create guidelines for a global standard for including regulatory sandboxes that can be adapted locally and are useful in ensuring consistency in tackling AI-driven misinformation.
- Regulators can propose to offer incentives to companies that participate in sandboxes. This would encourage innovation in developing anti-misinformation tools, which could include tax breaks or grants.
- Awareness campaigns can help in educating the public about the risks of AI-driven misinformation and the role of regulatory sandboxes can help manage public expectations.
- Periodic and regular reviews and updates to the sandbox frameworks should be conducted to keep pace with advancements in AI technology and emerging forms of misinformation should be emphasized.
Conclusion and the Challenges for Regulatory Frameworks
Regulatory sandboxes offer a promising pathway to counter the challenges that AI-driven misinformation poses while fostering innovation. By providing a controlled environment for testing new AI tools, these sandboxes can help refine technologies aimed at detecting and mitigating false information. This approach ensures that AI development aligns with societal needs and regulatory standards, fostering greater trust and transparency. With the right support and ongoing adaptations, regulatory sandboxes can become vital in countering the spread of AI-generated misinformation, paving the way for a more secure and informed digital ecosystem.
References
- https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/on-the-importance-of-regulatory-sandboxes-in-artificial-intelligence/article68176084.ece
- https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/regulatory-sandboxes-in-artificial-intelligence_8f80a0e6-en.html
- https://www.weforum.org/publications/global-risks-report-2024/
- https://democracy-reporting.org/en/office/global/publications/chatbot-audit#Conclusions
