#FactCheck - Deepfake Video Falsely Claims visuals of a massive rally held in Manipur
Executive Summary:
A viral online video claims visuals of a massive rally organised in Manipur for stopping the violence in Manipur. However, the CyberPeace Research Team has confirmed that the video is a deep fake, created using AI technology to manipulate the crowd into existence. There is no original footage in connection to any similar protest. The claim that promotes the same is therefore, false and misleading.
Claims:
A viral post falsely claims of a massive rally held in Manipur.
Fact Check:
Upon receiving the viral posts, we conducted a Google Lens search on the keyframes of the video. We could not locate any authentic sources mentioning such event held recently or previously. The viral video exhibited signs of digital manipulation, prompting a deeper investigation.
We used AI detection tools, such as TrueMedia and Hive AI Detection tool, to analyze the video. The analysis confirmed with 99.7% confidence that the video was a deepfake. The tools identified "substantial evidence of manipulation," particularly in the crowd and colour gradience , which were found to be artificially generated.
Additionally, an extensive review of official statements and interviews with Manipur State officials revealed no mention of any such rally. No credible reports were found linking to such protests, further confirming the video’s inauthenticity.
Conclusion:
The viral video claims visuals of a massive rally held in Manipur. The research using various tools such as truemedia.org and other AI detection tools confirms that the video is manipulated using AI technology. Additionally, there is no information in any official sources. Thus, the CyberPeace Research Team confirms that the video was manipulated using AI technology, making the claim false and misleading.
- Claim: Massive rally held in Manipur against the ongoing violence viral on social media.
- Claimed on: Instagram and X(Formerly Twitter)
- Fact Check: False & Misleading
Related Blogs
.webp)
Introduction
Social media platforms have begun to shape the public understanding of history in today’s digital landscape. You may have encountered videos, images, and posts that claim to reveal an untold story about our past. For example, you might have seen a post on your feed that has a painted or black and white image of a princess and labelled as "the most beautiful princess of Rajasthan who fought countless wars but has been erased from history.” Such emotionally charged narratives spread quickly, without any academic scrutiny or citation. Unfortunately, the originator believes it to be true.
Such unverified content may look harmless. But it profoundly contributes to the systematic distortion of historical information. Such misinformation reoccurs on feeds and becomes embedded in popular memory. It misguides the public discourse and undermines the scholarly research on the relevant topic. Sometimes, it also contributes to communal outrage and social tensions. It is time to recognise that protecting the integrity of our cultural and historical narratives is not only an academic concern but a legal and institutional responsibility. This is where the role of the Ministry of Culture becomes critical.
Pseudohistorical News Information in India
Fake news and misinformation are frequently disseminated via images, pictures, and videos on various messaging applications, which is referred to as “WhatsApp University” in a derogatory way. WhatsApp has become India’s favourite method of communication, while users have to stay very conscious about what they are consuming from forwarded messages. Academic historians strive to understand the past in its context to differentiate it from the present, whereas pseudo-historians try to manipulate history to satisfy their political agendas. Unfortunately, this wave of pseudo-history is expanding rapidly, with platforms like 'WhatsApp University' playing a significant role in amplifying its spread. This has led to an increase in fake historical news and paid journalism. Unlike pseudo-history, academic history is created by professional historians in academic contexts, adhering to strict disciplinary guidelines, including peer review and expert examination of justifications, assertions, and publications.
How to Identify Pseudo-Historic Misinformation
1. Lack of Credible Sources: There is a lack of reliable primary and secondary sources. Instead, pseudohistorical works depend on hearsay and unreliable eyewitness accounts.
2. Selective Use of Evidence: Misinformative posts portray only those facts that support their argument and minimise the facts which is contradictory to their assertions.
3. Incorporation of Conspiracy Theories: They often include conspiracy theories, which postulate secret groups, repressed knowledge. They might mention that evil powers influenced the historical events. Such hypotheses frequently lack any supporting data.
4. Extravagant Claims: Pseudo-historic tales sometimes present unbelievable assertions about historic persons or events.
5. Lack of Peer Review: Such work is generally never published on authentic academic platforms. You would not find them on platforms like LinkedIn, but on platforms like Instagram and Facebook, as they do not pitch for academic publications. Authentic historical research is examined by subject-matter authorities.
6. Neglect of Established Historiographical Methods: Such posts lack knowledge of a recognised methodology and procedures, like the critical study of sources.
7. Ideologically Driven Narratives: Political, communal, ideological, and personal opinions are prioritised in such posts. The author has a prior goal, instead of finding the truth.
8. Exploitation of Gaps in the Historical Record: Pseudo-historians often use missing or unclear parts of history to suggest that regular historians are hiding important secrets. They make the story sound more mysterious than it is.
9. Rejection of Scholarly Consensus: Pseudo-historians often reject the views of experts and historians, choosing instead to believe and promote their strange ideas.
10. Emphasis on Sensationalism: Pseudo-historical works may put more emphasis on sensationalism than academic rigour to pique public interest rather than offer a fair and thorough account of the history.
Legal and Institutional Responsibility
Public opinion is the heart of democracy. It should not be affected by any misinformation or disinformation. Vested interests cannot be allowed to sabotage this public opinion. Specifically, when it concerns academia, it cannot be shared unverified without any fact-checking. Such unverified claims can be called out, and action can be taken only if the authorities take over the charge. In India, the Indian Council of Historical Research (ICHR) regulates the historical academia. As per the official website, their stated aim is to “take all such measures as may be found necessary from time to time to promote historical research and its utilisation in the country,”. However, it is now essential to modernise the functioning of the ICHR to meet the demands of the digital era. Concerned authorities can run campaigns and awareness programmes to question the validity and research of such misinformative posts. Just as there are fact-checking mechanisms for news, there must also be an institutional push to fact-check and regulate historical content online. The following measures can be taken by authorities to strike down such misinformation online:
- Launch a nationwide awareness campaign about historical misinformation.
- Work with scholars, historians, and digital platforms to promote verified content.
- Encourage social media platforms to introduce fact-check labels for historical posts.
- Consider legal frameworks that penalise the deliberate spread of false historical narratives.
History is part of our national heritage, and preserving its accuracy is a matter of public interest. Misinformation and pseudo-history are a combination that misleads the public and weakens the foundation of shared cultural identity. In this digital era, false narratives spread rapidly, and it is important to promote critical thinking, encourage responsible academic work, and ensure that the public has access to accurate and well-researched historical information. Protecting the integrity of history is not just the work of historians — it is a collective responsibility that serves the future of our democracy.
References:
- https://kuey.net/index.php/kuey/article/view/4091
- https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-news-editorials/social-media-and-the-menace-of-false-information
What Is a VPN and its Significance
A Virtual Private Network (VPN) creates a secure and reliable network connection between a device and the internet. It hides your IP address by rerouting it through the VPN’s host servers. For example, if you connect to a US server, you appear to be browsing from the US, even if you’re in India. It also encrypts the data being transferred in real-time so that it is not decipherable by third parties such as ad companies, the government, cyber criminals, or others.
All online activity leaves a digital footprint that is tracked for data collection, and surveillance, increasingly jeopardizing user privacy. VPNs are thus a powerful tool for enhancing the privacy and security of users, businesses, governments and critical sectors. They also help protect users on public Wi-Fi networks ( for example, at airports and hotels), journalists, activists and whistleblowers, remote workers and businesses, citizens in high-surveillance states, and researchers by affording them a degree of anonymity.
What VPNs Do and Don’t
- What VPNs Can Do:
- Mask your IP address to enhance privacy.
- Encrypt data to protect against hackers, especially on public Wi-Fi.
- Bypass geo-restrictions (e.g., access streaming content blocked in India).
- What VPNs Cannot Do:
- Make you completely anonymous and protect your identity (websites can still track you via cookies, browser fingerprinting, etc.).
- Protect against malware or phishing.
- Prevent law enforcement from tracing you if they have access to VPN logs.
- Free VPNs usually even share logs with third parties.
VPNs in the Context of India’s Privacy Policy Landscape
In April 2022, CERT-In (Computer Emergency Response Team- India) released Directions under Section 70B (6) of the Information Technology (“IT”) Act, 2000, mandating VPN service providers to store customer data such as “validated names of subscribers/customers hiring the services, period of hire including dates, IPs allotted to / being used by the members, email address and IP address and time stamp used at the time of registration/onboarding, the purpose for hiring services, validated address and contact numbers, and the ownership pattern of the subscribers/customers hiring services” collected as part of their KYC (Know Your Customer) requirements, for a period of five years, even after the subscription has been cancelled. While this directive was issued to aid with cybersecurity investigations, it undermines the core purpose of VPNs- anonymity and privacy. It also gave operators very little time to carry out compliance measures.
Following this, operators such as NordVPN, ExpressVPN, ProtonVPN, and others pulled their physical servers out of India, and now use virtual servers hosted abroad (e.g., Singapore) with Indian IP addresses. While the CERT-In Directions have extra-territorial applicability, virtual servers are able to bypass them since they physically operate from a foreign jurisdiction. This means that they are effectively not liable to provide user information to Indian investigative agencies, beating the whole purpose of the directive. To counter this, the Indian government could potentially block non-compliant VPN services in the future. Further, there are concerns about overreach since the Directions are unclear about how long CERT-In can retain the data it acquires from VPN operators, how it will be used and safeguarded, and the procedure of holding VPN operators responsible for compliance.
Conclusion: The Need for a Privacy-Conscious Framework
The CERT-In Directions reflect a governance model which, by prioritizing security over privacy, compromises on safeguards like independent oversight or judicial review to balance the two. The policy design renders a lose-lose situation because virtual VPN services are still available, while the government loses oversight. If anything, this can make it harder for the government to track suspicious activity. It also violates the principle of proportionality established in the landmark privacy judgment, Puttaswamy v. Union of India (II) by giving government agencies the power to collect excessive VPN data on any user. These issues underscore the need for a national-level, privacy-conscious cybersecurity framework that informs other policies on data protection and cybercrime investigations. In the meantime, users who use VPNs are advised to choose reputable providers, ensure strong encryption, and follow best practices to maintain online privacy and security.
References
- https://www.kaspersky.com/resource-center/definitions/what-is-a-vpn
- https://internetfreedom.in/top-secret-one-year-on-cert-in-refuses-to-reveal-information-about-compliance-notices-issued-under-its-2022-directions-on-cybersecurity/#:~:text=tl;dr,under%20this%20new%20regulatory%20mandate.
- https://www.wired.com/story/vpn-firms-flee-india-data-collection-law/#:~:text=Starting%20today%2C%20the%20Indian%20Computer,years%2C%20even%20after%20they%20have
Executive Summary
A video circulating on social media shows a woman using abusive language in front of a camera. Users sharing the clip claim that the woman is a professor at Galgotias University and that the video exposes her alleged reality. However, an research by CyberPeace found the claim to be misleading. The probe revealed that the woman seen in the viral video has no connection with Galgotias University and is not a professor there.Fact-checking further showed that the video is not recent but around seven years old. The woman featured in the clip was identified as Shubhrastha, who is a political strategist by profession.
Claim:
A user on X (formerly Twitter) shared the viral video on February 18, 2026, claiming: “A ‘class in abuse studies’ at Galgotias University? An obscene video of a professor teaching ethics has gone viral. Another shameful chapter has been added to the list of controversies surrounding Galgotias University.” The post further alleged that after falsely claiming a Chinese robot as its own, the university’s “Culture and Ethics” faculty member was seen publicly using abusive language in the viral clip. The post link and its archived version are provided below:
Fact Check:
To verify the authenticity of the viral claim, we extracted key frames from the video and conducted a reverse image search using Google Lens. During the research , we found the same video uploaded on the Indian Spectator’s YouTube channel on June 9, 2018
The video was also found on another YouTube channel, where it had been uploaded on June 12, 2018.
Conclusion
The research clearly establishes that the woman seen in the viral video has no association with Galgotias University and is not a professor there. The clip is also not recent but approximately seven years old. The woman in the video was identified as Shubhrastha, a political strategist.
