#FactCheck - AI-Generated Video Falsely Claims Israeli PM Netanyahu Announced Aid for Afghanistan at PM Modi’s Request

Introduction

When a tragedy strikes, moments are fragile, people are vulnerable, emotions run high, and every second is important. In such critical situations, information becomes as crucial as food, water, shelter, and medication. As soon as any information is received, it often leads to stampedes and chaos. Alongside the tragedy, whether natural or man-made, emerges another threat: misinformation. People, desperate for answers, cling to whatever they can find.

Tragedies can take many forms. These may include natural disasters, mass accidents, terrorist activities, or other emergencies. During the 2023 earthquakes in Turkey, misinformation spread on social media claiming that the Yarseli Dam had cracked and was about to burst. People believed it and began migrating from the area. Panic followed, and search and rescue teams stopped operations in that zone. Precious hours were lost. Later, it was confirmed to be a rumour. By then, the damage was already done.

Similarly, after the recent plane crash in Ahmedabad, India, numerous rumours and WhatsApp messages spread rapidly. One message claimed to contain the investigation report on the crash of Air India flight AI-171. It was later called out by PIB and declared fake.

These examples show how misinformation can take control of already painful moments. During emergencies, when emotions are intense and fear is widespread, false information spreads faster and hits harder. Some people share it unknowingly, while others do so to gain attention or push a certain agenda. But for those already in distress, the effect is often the same. It brings ore confusion, heightens anxiety, and adds to their suffering.

‍

Understanding Disasters and the Role of Media in Crisis

Disaster can be defined as a natural or human-caused situation that causes a transformation from a usual life of society into a crisis that is far beyond its existing response capacity. It can have minimal or maximum effects, from mere disruption in daily life practices to as adverse as inability to meet basic requirements of life like food, water and shelter. Hence, the disaster is not just a sudden event. It becomes a disaster when it overwhelms a community’s ability to cope with it. 

To cope with such situations, there is an organised approach called Disaster Management.  It includes preventive measures, minimising damages and helping communities recover. Earlier, public institutions like governments used to be the main actors in disaster management, but today, with every small entity having a role, academic institutions, media outlets and even ordinary people are involved. 

Communication is an important element in disaster management. It saves lives when done correctly. People who are vulnerable need to know what’s happening, what they should do and where to seek help.  It involves risk in today’s instantaneous communication. 

Research shows that the media often fails to focus on disaster preparedness. For example, studies found that during the 2019 Istanbul earthquake, the media focused more on dramatic scenes than on educating people. Similar trends were seen during the 2023 Turkey earthquakes. Rather than helping people prepare or stay calm, much of the media coverage amplified fear and sensationalised suffering. This shows a shift from preventive, helpful reporting to reactive, emotional storytelling. In doing so, the media sometimes fails in its duty to support resilience and worse, can become a channel for spreading misinformation during already traumatic events. However, fighting misinformation is not just someone’s liability. It is penalised in the official disaster management strategy. Section 54 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 mentions that "Whoever makes or circulates a false alarm or warning as to disaster or its severity or magnitude, leading to panic, shall, on conviction, be punishable with imprisonment which may extend to one year or with a fine."

‍

AI as a Tool in Countering Misinformation 

AI has emerged as a powerful mechanism to fight against misinformation. AI technologies like Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Machine Learning (ML) are effective in spotting and classifying misinformation with up to 97% accuracy. AI flags unverified content, leading to a 24% decrease in shares and 7% drop in likes on platforms like TikTok.  Up to 95% fewer people view content on Facebook when fact-checking labels are used. Facebook AI also eliminates 86% of graphic violence, 96% of adult nudity, 98.5% of fake accounts and 99.5% of content related to terrorism. These tools help rebuild public trust in addition to limiting the dissemination of harmful content. In 2023, support for tech companies acting to combat misinformation rose to 65%, indicating a positive change in public expectations and awareness.

‍

How to Counter Misinformation

Experts should step up in such situations. Social media has allowed many so-called experts to spread fake information without any real knowledge, research, or qualification. In such conditions, real experts such as authorities, doctors, scientists, public health officials, researchers, etc., need to take charge. They can directly address the myths and false claims and stop misinformation before it spreads further and reduce confusion. 

Responsible journalism is crucial during crises. In times of panic, people look at the media for guidance. Hence, it is important to fact-check every detail before publishing. Reporting that is based on unclear tips, social media posts, or rumours can cause major harm by inciting mistrust, fear, or even dangerous behaviour. Cross-checking information, depending on reliable sources and promptly fixing errors are all components of responsible journalism. Protecting the public is more important than merely disseminating the news.

Focus on accuracy rather than speed. News spreads in a blink in today's world. Media outlets and influencers often come under pressure to publish it first.  But in tragic situations like natural disasters and disease outbreaks, rushing to come first is not as important as accuracy is, as a single piece of misinformation can spark mass-scale panic and can slow down emergency efforts and lead people to make rash decisions. Taking a little more time to check the facts ensures that the information being shared is helpful, not harmful. Accuracy may save numerous lives during tragedies. 

Misinformation spreads quickly it can only be prevented if people learn to critically evaluate what they hear and see. This entails being able to spot biased or deceptive headlines, cross-check claims and identify reliable sources.  Digital literacy is of utmost importance; it makes people less susceptible to fear-based rumours, conspiracy theories and hoaxes. 

Disaster preparedness programs should include awareness about the risks of spreading unverified information. Communities, schools and media platforms must educate people on how to respond responsibly during emergencies by staying calm, checking facts and sharing only credible updates. Spreading fake alerts or panic-inducing messages during a crisis is not only dangerous, but it can also have legal consequences. Public communication must focus on promoting trust, calm and clarity. When people understand the weight their words can carry during a crisis, they become part of the solution, not the problem.

References: 

1. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/3556152 
2. https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/SMWG_Countering-False-Info-Social-Media-Disasters-Emergencies_Mar2018-508.pdf 
3. https://english.mathrubhumi.com/news/india/fake-whatsapp-message-air-india-crash-pib-fact-check-fcwmvuyc ‍
4. https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/SMWG_Countering-False-Info-Social-Media-Disasters-Emergencies_Mar2018-508.pdf

Executive Summary

‍
‍
A social media post card featuring a photo of US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, carrying the logo of Navbharat Times, is being widely circulated online. The post claims that Rubio made a remark criticizing the Indian government, allegedly stating that “those in power through EVMs should tell us what to do and what not to do.” CyberPeace Research Wing  research found the claim to be false. There is no evidence of Marco Rubio making any such statement, and the viral post card is fabricated.

‍

Claim:

‍

A post shared by SP leader IP Singh alleged that the US Secretary made comments questioning the legitimacy of the Indian government and EVM-based elections, further linking it to broader political criticism of EVMs.

Post link: https://x.com/IPSinghSp/status/2066740933396492706?s=20, https://archive.ph/submit/?url 

‍

‍

Fact Check:

‍

A keyword search of the alleged statement revealed no credible reports or official records of Marco Rubio making any such remark. Additionally, a review of Navbharat Times’ official social media handles did not show any such post card being published, indicating that the viral graphic is not authentic. Further examination of recent statements by Marco Rubio showed no reference to EVMs or the Indian electoral system. Instead, a Navbharat Times report dated June 14 covered a different issue related to tensions in the Hormuz Strait, where Rubio commented on the killing of Indian sailors during a maritime incident and emphasized compliance with US directives for commercial vessels. https://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/world/america/marco-rubio-remarks-on-killing-of-indian-sailors-in-hormuz-strait-insult-of-india-says

‍

‍

Conclusion:

‍‍

The research confirms that US Secretary of State Marco Rubio did not make any statement regarding EVMs or the Indian government. The viral post card is fake and misleading.

‍

Introduction

For more than 10 years, WhatsApp has been designed around one seemingly trivial but impactful idea: your phone number is your digital identity. This concept offered simplicity in terms of contact discovery and onboard- ing but inevitably exposed users to fraud, spam and the everyday necessity of sharing personal phone numbers with complete strangers in group chats and conversations. On June 29th Meta finally revealed a major move: you’ll now be able to choose and reservate a WhatsApp username and communicate without sharing your phone number.  

This shift to a username based identity marks the company catching up to platforms like Telegram and Signal, which have utilized this functionality for years. 

However, while presented as a push towards greater privacy for the millions using its platform, this new change has already created some alarm around impersonation, cybersquatting, and identity theft. The issues became amplified when, according to reports, the Indian Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology advised WhatsApp to halt the implementation of the new features while it clarifies details, shifting a mundane app update into a high-stakes discussion on digital privacy, platform responsibility, and government regulation.

How does the mechanism work?

“WhatsApp’s username is an added pseudonym layer on its current phone number architecture, not a replacement,” Meta said in a statement on Thursday, as reported by TechCrunch. A WhatsApp username is a three to 35-character name containing lower case letters, numbers, periods and underscores that must contain at least one letter and “should not look like a website address.” The feature will allow you to “reserve a unique identifier that you can share as an alternative to your phone number in WhatsApp Settings - Accounts - Username.”

It said the usernames will work in parallel with a username key which can serve as a passphrase to initiate conversation “with a recipient before sending a message for the first time.”

“The change - which will have some additional, protective measures like reserving usernames for people of public interest or those that would cause impersonation, and rate limits on claiming names - can help maintain phone number protection, while offering people more choices,” Meta said. WhatsApp said usernames will replace phone numbers as the primary way to initiate new chats, but will not be publicly searchable: “Anyone you message would need your exact username, and would still need you to respond.”

The Genuine Privacy Case 

The upside is real. Phone numbers double as keys to two-factor authentication, banking apps and SIM-swap fraud, so handing one to a new acquaintance, a group chat of strangers or a customer-support bot has always carried quiet risk. Numbers harvested from public groups already fuel spam and scam campaigns, and a username-first model narrows that exposure considerably. 

For journalists, small business owners and anyone who fields messages from people they've never met, decoupling identity from a number that also unlocks their bank account is a meaningful, overdue shift – and one that WhatsApp's closest competitors adopted years ago without major incident. 

The Scammer's Paradise Scenario

The trouble lies in what a username removes. A phone number was never just an identifier; it was also a rough verification signal and, for law enforcement, a traceable data point. Security reporters testing the reservation system found that lookalike handles mimicking prominent Indian politicians, film stars and the Reserve Bank of India remained available to claim. Crypto executive Changpeng Zhao's own failed bid to capture his desired handle highlighted the first-come, first-served danger of the rollout and led researchers to advise people to manually activate the optional username key that Meta leaves disabled by default. 

The Mozilla Foundation was unvarnished about the tradeoff, noting that impersonation from fake accounts and scams are an “inevitable consequence” of a design that abandons the “implicit signal of authenticity” that comes from owning a phone number. 

Indian entrepreneur Ankur Warikoo called the rollout a potential “disaster” if robust enforcement against fraud isn’t immediately applied because scammers could register handles a few characters removed from a popular brand or public figure to launch investment and payment schemes, a concern mirrored by cyber security researchers who observed that many users neglect to check verification badges before trusting an account.

India's Regulatory Scrutiny of WhatsApp's Username Feature

So far the strongest reaction comes from New Delhi. The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) issued an official notice to Meta's compliance office that it should “temporarily suspend the feature” in the country pending further consultations and “provided an explanation in three days”. The cited concerns involve “digital arrest” fraud, a rapid boom category that involves crooks impersonating investigators like those with India's CBI, judges or customs agents to extort victims, in addition to standard concerns around phishing and bank or government impersonation. 

A subtler concern, for India’s government anyway, is “traceability.” 

At present, say officials, an Indian mobile number is a launching pad to determine whether a given suspect is a domestic or international actor, while a username and foreign SIM would leave authorities nowhere to begin. The Department of Telecommunications independently voiced concerns over how the change intersects with its SIM-binding regulations and over WhatsApp's lag time for such requests. The MeitY notice, the legal basis for which, incidentally, is in contention with some digital rights groups, specifically invokes Section 79 of the IT Act and various IT Rules from 2021 and provisions on identity theft and impersonation that target individual criminals rather than the tech tools. Not everyone, however, shares MeitY’s reading of the legal ground: the Internet Freedom Foundation says that Section 79 “deal with liability of intermediary” and “does not confer on the government power to license the features of a product,” while arguing the relevant criminal statutes were designed to criminalize impersonators, not tech platforms whose services are misused, echoing concerns that killed a similar government advisement about AI models last spring. 

In the meantime, Meta says usernames are unavailable in the country for now and the multilayered safeguards it designed were always intended for exactly this level of risk.

Conclusion 

WhatsApp's username feature is neither a total privacy upgrade nor a major security problem; instead, it reallocates risk, reducing phone number exposure while adding a risk of identity spoofing and misuse. Whether it pays off will hinge on the strength of Meta's crackdown on fraudulent usernames, the uptake of extra security features like the username key and whether the company can adequately satisfy regulatory concerns about traceability and user safety. Until all those questions are fully settled, users may want to use the feature tentatively, secure a desired username, enable any other protections and be watchful about new contacts.

References

1. https://blog.whatsapp.com/its-time-to-reserve-your-whatsapp-username
2. https://www.businesstoday.in/technology/news/story/whatsapp-usernames-why-indias-top-creators-fear-scams-impersonation-and-identity-theft-540359-2026-07-02
3. https://www.outlookindia.com/national/outlook-explains-why-is-the-indian-government-worried-about-whatsapp-usernames
4. https://techcrunch.com/2026/06/29/whatsapp-now-lets-you-reserve-usernames/
5. https://bestmediainfo.com/mediainfo/mediainfo-digital/whatsapp-says-username-feature-not-live-yet-after-meity-asks-meta-to-pause-rollout-12124813 

‍