#FactCheck-Old Photo of Kareena Kapoor Khan Falsely Shared as Fresh Pregnancy Claim
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.
Related Blogs
Executive Summary:
A video featuring Sara Netanyahu, wife of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is being widely circulated on social media. In the clip, she is seen attending an online meeting and repeatedly closing her eyes. The video is being shared with claims that it is recent and shows her under the influence of drugs. Some posts also suggest that Prime Minister Netanyahu has died. However, research by the CyberPeace found that the claim is misleading. The video is not recent and has been online since 2020.
Claim:
Social media users are sharing the video claiming that Sara Netanyahu appeared intoxicated following the alleged death of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The clip is also being falsely presented as a recent development. An X user, Christopher Montgomery (@Montgsignals), shared the video with the caption suggesting that Netanyahu may have died and that his wife appeared in a drug-influenced state during a recent court hearing via Zoom.
Fact Check:
To verify the claim, we first examined reports regarding the alleged death of Benjamin Netanyahu. There is no credible evidence supporting this claim. In fact, on March 20, Netanyahu himself addressed the media and dismissed such rumours, confirming that he is alive.
We then analyzed the viral video by extracting keyframes and conducting a reverse search. This led us to the same video posted on a Facebook account under the name Roni Schneider Malia on November 4, 2020. The Hebrew caption associated with the post translates to: “Filmed during a psychological conference on Zoom.”
This confirms that the video is old and unrelated to any recent developments.
Conclusion:
The viral claim is misleading. The video of Sara Netanyahu is not recent but has been available online since 2020. It is being falsely linked to baseless claims about Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s death
Introduction: Reasons Why These Amendments Have Been Suggested.
The suggested changes in the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, are the much-needed regulatory reaction to the blistering emergence of synthetic information and deepfakes. These reforms are due to the pressing necessity to govern risks within the digital ecosystem as opposed to regular reformation.
The Emergence of the Digital Menace
Generative AI tools have also facilitated the generation of very realistic images, videos, audio, and text in recent years. Such artificial media have been abused to portray people in situations they are not in or in statements they have never said. The market size is expected to have a compound annual growth rate(CAGR) from 2025 to 2031 of 37.57%, resulting in a market volume of US$400.00 bn by 2031. Therefore, tight regulatory controls are necessary to curb a high prevalence of harm in the Indian digital world.
The Gap in Law and Institution
None of the IT Rules, 2021, clearly addressed synthetic content. Although the Information Technology Act, 2000 dealt with identity theft, impersonation and violation of privacy, the intermediaries were not explicitly obligated on artificial media. This left a loophole in enforcement, particularly since AI-generated content might get around the old system of moderation. These amendments bring India closer to the international standards, including the EU AI Act, which requires transparency and labelling of AI-driven content. India addresses such requirements and adapts to local constitutional and digital ecosystem needs.
II. Explanation of the Amendments
The amendments of 2025 present five alternative changes in the current IT Rules framework, which address various areas of synthetic media regulation.
A. Definitional Clarification: Synthetic Generation of Information Introduction.
Rule 2(1)(wa) Amendment:
The amendments provide an all-inclusive definition of what is meant by “synthetically generated information” as information, which is created, or produced, changed or distorted with the use of a computer resource, in a way that such information can reasonably be perceived to be genuine. This definition is intentionally broad and is not limited to deepfakes in the strict sense but to any artificial media that has gone through algorithmic manipulation in order to have a semblance of authenticity.
Expansion of Legal Scope:
Rule 2(1A) also makes it clear that any mention of information in the context of unlawful acts, namely, including categories listed in Rule 3(1)(b), Rule 3(1)(d), Rule 4(2), and Rule 4(4), should be understood to mean synthetically generated information. This is a pivotal interpretative protection that does not allow intermediaries to purport that synthetic versions of illegal material are not under the control of the regulation since they are algorithmic creations and not descriptions of what actually occurred.
B. Safe Harbour Protection and Content Removal Requirements
Amendment, rule 3(1)(b)- Safe Harbour Clarification:
The amendments add a certain proviso to the Rule (3) (1)(b) that explains a deletion or facilitation of access of synthetically produced information (or any information falling within specified categories) which the intermediaries have made in good faith as part of reasonable endeavours or at the receipt of a complaint shall not be considered a breach of the Section 79(2) (a) or (b) of the Information Technology Act, 2000. This coverage is relevant especially since it insures the intermediaries against liability in situations where they censor the synthetic contents in advance of a court ruling or governmental warnings.
C. Labelling and Metadata Requirements that are mandatory on Intermediaries that enable the creation of synthetic content
The amendments establish a new framework of due diligence in Rule 3(3) on the case of intermediaries that offer tools to generate, modify, or alter the synthetically generated information. Two fundamental requirements are laid down.
- The generated information must be prominently labelled or embedded with a permanent, unique metadata or identifier. The label or metadata must be:
- Visibly displayed or made audible in a prominent manner on or within that synthetically generated information.
- It should cover at least 10% of the surface of the visual display or, in the case of audio content, during the initial 10% of its duration.
- It can be used to immediately identify that such information is synthetically generated information which has been created, generated, modified, or altered using the computer resource of the intermediary.
- The intermediary in clause (a) shall not enable modification, suppression or removal of such label, permanent unique metadata or identifier, by whatever name called.
D. Important Social Media Intermediaries- Pre-Publication Checking Responsibilities
The amendments present a three-step verification mechanism, under Rule 4(1A), to Significant Social Media Intermediaries (SSMIs), which enables displaying, uploading or publishing on its computer resource before such display, uploading, or publication has to follow three steps.
Step 1- User Declaration: It should compel the users to indicate whether the materials they are posting are synthetically created. This puts the first burden on users.
Step 2-Technical Verification: To ensure that the user is truly valid, the SSMIs need to provide reasonable technical means, such as automated tools or other applications. This duty is contextual and would be based on the nature, format and source of content. It does not allow intermediaries to escape when it is known that not every type of content can be verified using the same standards.
Step 3- Prominent Labelling: In case the synthetic origin is verified by user declaration or technical verification, SSMIs should have a notice or label that is prominently displayed to be seen by users before publication.
The amendments provide a better system of accountability and set that intermediaries will be found to have failed due diligence in a case where it is established that they either knowingly permitted, encouraged or otherwise failed to act on synthetically produced information in contravention of these requirements. This brings in an aspect of knowledge, and intermediaries cannot use accidental errors as an excuse for non-compliance.
An explanation clause makes it clear that SSMIs should also make reasonable and proportionate technical measures to check user declarations and keep no synthetic content published without adequate declaration or labelling. This eliminates confusion on the role of the intermediaries with respect to making declarations.
III. Attributes of The Amendment Framework
- Precision in Balancing Innovation and Accountability.
The amendments have commendably balanced two extreme regulatory postures by neither prohibiting nor allowing the synthetic media to run out of control. It has recognised the legitimate use of synthetic media creation in entertainment, education, research and artistic expression by adopting a transparent and traceable mandate that preserves innovation while ensuring accountability.
- Overt Acceptance of the Intermediary Liability and Reverse Onus of Knowledge
Rule 4(1A) gives a highly significant deeming rule; in cases where the intermediary permits or refrains from acting with respect to the synthetic content knowing that the rules are violated, it will be considered as having failed to comply with the due diligence provisions. This description closes any loopholes in unscrupulous supervision where intermediaries can be able to argue that they did so. Standard of scienter promotes material investment in the detection devices and censor mechanisms that have been in place to offer security to the platforms that have sound systems, albeit the fact that the tools fail to capture violations at times.
- Clarity Through Definition and Interpretive Guidance
The cautious definition of the term “synthetically generated information” and the guidance that is provided in Rule 2(1A) is an admirable attempt to solve confusion in the previous regulatory framework. Instead of having to go through conflicting case law or regulatory direction, the amendments give specific definitional limits. The purposefully broad formulation (artificially or algorithmically created, generated, modified or altered) makes sure that the framework is not avoided by semantic games over what is considered to be a real synthetic content versus a slight algorithmic alteration.
- Insurance of non-accountability but encourages preventative moderation
The safe harbour clarification of the Rule 3(1)(b) amendment clearly safeguards the intermediaries who voluntarily dismiss the synthetic content without a court order or government notification. It is an important incentive scheme that prompts platforms to implement sound self-regulation measures. In the absence of such protection, platforms may also make rational decisions to stay in a passive stance of compliance, only deleting content under the pressure of an external authority, thus making them more effective in keeping users safe against dangerous synthetic media.
IV. Conclusion
The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules 2025 suggest a structured, transparent, and accountable execution of curbing the rising predicaments of synthetic media and deepfakes. The amendments deal with the regulatory and interpretative gaps that have always existed in determining what should be considered as synthetically generated information, the intermediary liabilities and the mandatory labelling and metadata requirement. Safe-harbour protection will encourage the moderation proactively, and a scienter-based liability rule will not permit the intermediaries to escape liability when they are aware of the non-compliance but tolerate such non-compliance. The idea to introduce pre-publication verification of Significant Social Media Intermediaries adds the responsibility to users and due diligence to the platform. Overall, the amendments provide a reasonable balance between innovation and regulation, make the process more open with its proper definitions, promote responsible conduct on the platform and transform India and the new standards in the sphere of synthetic media regulation. They collaborate to enhance the verisimilitude, defence of the users, and visibility of the systems of the digital ecosystem of India.
V. References
2. https://www.statista.com/outlook/tmo/artificial-intelligence/generative-ai/worldwide
.webp)
Incident Overview
Earlier this week, the Chinese media reported that several ‘Macau’ government websites were hacked, indicating a significant targeted cyberattack. The hacked website includes those of the office of the Secretary for Security, the public security police, the fire services department and the Security Forces Services Bureau. It was reported that the police have launched a criminal investigation to trace the source of the crime. Furthermore, officials believe the source of the intrusion was likely from overseas, and authorities have carried out an emergency response in conjunction with telecommunication operators to restore affected services on a priority basis. The densely populated Macau is a special administrative region on the south coast of China and the cyber attacks on the essential government website of China raise a serious concern.
Response and Mitigation
Macau's authorities carried out an emergency response in collaboration with telecommunication operators to restore regular services as a distributed denial-of-service attack (DDoS) was reported to be carried out on certain government websites which resulted in the inactivity of those several websites. The country's security forces instructed Macau Telecom to investigate the incident and submit a report and improvement plan to prevent similar attacks in the future.
Context and Implications
The hack on the government websites of Macau is not a single incident; rather, it is a part of an increasing pattern of cyberattacks on the region's vital infrastructure. According to a recent report, the frequency of cybercrimes has tripled since 2020, targeting Macau's critical infrastructure, which is worrying. This pattern draws attention to the growing threats that public sector organisations and governments throughout the world confront.
Final Words
In light of such sophisticated attacks targeting vital infrastructure or critical government operations, it is imperative that the country ensure powerful cybersecurity strategies and measures. Implementing robust cybersecurity measures, developing incident response planning, regular security checks, employee training on cyber hygiene, public awareness and capacity building and international collaboration to jointly develop and plan counteract strategies is a crucial step to build safeguards against such cyber threats.
The incident of a cyberattack on the government websites of Macau serves stark reminder of the evolving threats and cybersecurity challenges, it is a serious concern when critical government websites are compromised by malicious actors. It highlights the necessity for continuous vigilance and cybersecurity measures in place to counter such cyber attacks. A comprehensive approach to cybersecurity, the government can enhance their overall cybersecurity posture, establish resilience against such threats in future, and save the functionality of essential government websites.
References:
- https://macaudailytimes.com.mo/websites-of-office-of-the-secretary-for-security-targeted-in-a-cyber-attack.html
- https://www.reuters.com/world/china/several-macau-government-websites-hacked-says-chinese-state-media-2024-07-11/
- https://4imag.com/several-macau-government-websites-hacked-says-chinese-state-media/
- https://www.aol.com/news/several-macau-government-websites-hacked-001435511.htmlhttps://therecord.media/macau-government-websites-hit-with-cyberattack
- https://macaonews.org/news/city/macau-cyberattacks-cyber-security-attacks-macao/
