#Factcheck-Viral Image of Men Riding an Elephant Next to a Tiger in Bihar is Misleading

Digital vulnerabilities like cyber-attacks and data breaches proliferate rapidly in the hyper-connected world that is created today. These vulnerabilities can compromise sensitive data like personal information, financial data, and intellectual property and can potentially threaten businesses of all sizes and in all sectors. Hence, it has become important to inform all stakeholders about any breach or attack to ensure they can be well-prepared for the consequences of such an incident.  

The non-reporting of reporting can result in heavy fines in many parts of the world. Data breaches caused by malicious acts are crimes and need proper investigation. Organisations may face significant penalties for failing to report the event. Failing to report data breach incidents can result in huge financial setbacks and legal complications. To understand why transparency is vital and understanding the regulatory framework that governs data breaches is the first step. 

The Current Indian Regulatory Framework on Data Breach Disclosure

A data breach essentially, is the unauthorised processing or accidental disclosure of personal data, which may occur through its acquisition, sharing, use, alteration, destruction, or loss of access. Such incidents can compromise the affected data’s confidentiality, integrity, or availability. In India, the Information Technology Act of 2000 and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act of 2023 are the primary legislation that tackles cybercrimes like data breaches. 

• Under the DPDP Act, neither materiality thresholds nor express timelines have been prescribed for the reporting requirement. Data Fiduciaries are required to report incidents of personal data breach, regardless of their sensitivity or impact on the Data Principal. 
• The IT (Indian Computer Emergency Response Team and Manner of Performing Functions and Duties) Rules, 2013, the IT (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data or Information) Rules, 2011, along with the Cyber Security Directions, under section 70B(6) of the IT Act, 2000, relating to information security practices, procedure, prevention, response and reporting of cyber incidents for Safe & Trusted Internet prescribed in 2022 impose mandatory notification requirements on service providers, intermediaries, data centres and corporate entities, upon the occurrence of certain cybersecurity incidents. 
• These laws and regulations obligate companies to report any breach and any incident to regulators such as the CERT-In and the Data Protection Board.

The Consequences of Non-Disclosure

A non-disclosure of a data breach has a manifold of consequences. They are as follows:

• Legal and financial penalties are the immediate consequence of a data breach in India. The DPDP Act prescribes a fine of up to Rs 250 Crore from the affected parties, along with suits of a civil nature and regulatory scrutiny. Non-compliance can also attract action from CERT-In, leading to more reputational damage.
• In the long term, failure to disclose data breaches can erode customer trust as they are less likely to engage with a brand that is deemed unreliable. Investor confidence may potentially waver due to concerns about governance and security, leading to stock price drops or reduced funding opportunities. Brand reputation can be significantly tarnished, and companies may struggle with retaining and attracting customers and employees. This can affect long-term profitability and growth.
• Companies such as BigBasket and Jio in 2020 and Haldiram in 2022 have suffered from data breaches recently. Poor transparency and delay in disclosures led to significant reputational damage, legal scrutiny, and regulatory actions for the companies.

Measures for Improvement: Building Corporate Reputation via Transparency

Transparency is critical when disclosing data breaches. It enhances trust and loyalty for a company when the priority is data privacy for stakeholders. Ensuring transparency mitigates backlash. It demonstrates a company’s willingness to cooperate with authorities. A farsighted approach instils confidence in all stakeholders in showcasing a company's resilience and commitment to governance. These measures can be further improved upon by:

• Offering actionable steps for companies to establish robust data breach policies, including regular audits, prompt notifications, and clear communication strategies. 
• Highlighting the importance of cooperation with regulatory bodies and how to ensure compliance with the DPDP Act and other relevant laws. 
• Sharing best public communications practices post-breach to manage reputational and legal risks.

Conclusion

Maintaining transparency when a data breach happens is more than a legal obligation. It is a good strategy to retain a corporate reputation. Companies can mitigate the potential risks (legal, financial and reputational) by informing stakeholders and cooperating with regulatory bodies proactively. In an era where digital vulnerabilities are ever-present, clear communication and compliance with data protection laws such as the DPDP Act build trust, enhance corporate governance, and secure long-term business success. Proactive measures, including audits, breach policies, and effective public communication, are critical in reinforcing resilience and fostering stakeholder confidence in the face of cyber threats.

References

• https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Digital%20Personal%20Data%20Protection%20Act%202023.pdf 
• https://www.cert-in.org.in/PDF/CERT-In_Directions_70B_28.04.2022.pdf 
• https://chawdamrunal.medium.com/the-dark-side-of-covering-up-data-breaches-why-transparency-is-crucial-fe9ed10aac27 
• https://www.dlapiperdataprotection.com/index.html?t=breach-notification&c=IN

Introduction

In today's relentless current of information, where social media is oftentimes both the stage and the playwright, the line between reality and spectacle can become distressingly blurry. In such a virtual Pantheon, the conflation of truth and fiction has recently surfaced in a particularly contentious instance. The central figure is Poonam Pandey, an entertainment personality known for transgressing traditional contours of celebrity boldness. Pandey found herself ensnared in a narrative of her own orchestration—a grim hoax purporting she had succumbed to cervical cancer. This deceptive foray, rather than awakening public consciousness as intended, spiralled into an ominous fable about the malignant spread of misinformation and the profound moral dilemmas it engenders.

The Deception

The tapestry of this event was woven with threads of tragedy and deception, framing Pandey both as the tragic hero and the ill-fated architect of a spectacle that unfolded with a haunting familiarity evocative of ancient Greek dramas. The monumental pillar of social media, on what seemed to be an ordinary day, was shattered by the startling declaration of Pandey's untimely passing. The statement, as bereft of nuance as it was devastating, proclaimed: 'We are deeply grieved to announce the loss of our cherished Poonam to cervical cancer.' The emotional pulse of the Indian Film Industry was jolted; waves of homage inundated the digital space, each tribute a poignant echo of the shock that rippled through her fanbase. Yet the crux of the matter had yet to be unveiled.

As the world grappled with this news, the scenario took an unforeseen detour. Poonam Pandey made a re-entrance onto the world stage, alive, revealing her alleged demise to be nothing more than a macabre masquerade. The public's reaction to this revelation was a stratified symphony of emotions—indignation mingled with disbelief, with an underlying crescendo of betrayal. Pandey's defense postured her act as a last resort to draw attention to the silent yet pervasive threat of cervical cancer. In the ensuing mire of reactions, an inescapable quandary emerged: is it ever permissible to employ deceit for the sake of presumed publicity?

The Chaos 

Satyajeet Tambe, an esteemed Maharashtra legislator, emerged amidst the churning chaos as a paragon of principled reason. Advocating that such mendacious stunts, playing the chords of public emotion and adulterating truth, should be met with legal repercussions, Tambe called for judicious action against Pandey. His imploration resonated with the necessity of integrity in the public domain, stating, 'The announcement of an influencer/model succumbing to cervical cancer should not be wielded as a tool for awareness.' His pronouncement sent reverberations through the collective conscience, echoing the need for accountability in the face of such transgressions.

Repercussion 

The All Indian Cine Workers Association, a custodian of the film industry's values, also voiced its reproach. They urged for an FIR to be lodged against Poonam Pandey, underlining their sentiments with disappointment and a keen sense of betrayal. Within their condemnation lay a profound recognition of the elevated emotional investment inherent in their industry—an industry where the reverence for life and the abhorrence of deceit intertwine, making the cultivation of such lowly stunts anathema.

This spectacle, while unique in the temerity of its execution, mirrors the broader pathological wave of misinformation that corrodes the foundations of our digital era: the malady of fake news. When delineated, fake news finds its essence as information chiselled specifically to deceive, a form of communication that is not merely slanted but entirely devoid of authenticity, manufactured with nefarious intent. A protean adversary, fake news adeptly masquerades as trustworthy news, ensnaring the unsuspecting in its tendrils. Its purveyors span a spectrum—from shadowy figures to ostensibly benign social media accounts—all contributing to a dystopian fabric where truth is persistently imperilled.

The conjurers of these illusions are, in a sense, cunning illusionists ensconced behind curtains of anonymity or masquerading under a cloak of transparency. They craft elaborate illusions devoid of truth, but dripping with sufficient plausibility to ensnare those who yearn for simplicity in an increasingly complex world. Destabilizing forces, such as hyper partisan media outlets, regurgitate a concoction of concocted 'facts' and distortions, deliberately smudging the once-clear line between empirical truth and partisan fabrication.

The Aftermath 

The Poonam Pandey episode stands as a harrowing beacon of the ethical abyss we face. It compels us to confront the irony of utilising falsity to raise awareness for laudable causes and considers the ramifications for public figures influencing the dissemination of information. The tempest around this event demonstrates the potent gravitational pull of information and the overarching need for the conscientious stewardship of its power.

Yet, as we sail through the murky waters of the digital expanse, where the allure of sensationalism and clickbait headlines is ever-present, our vigilance must not wane. The imperative of truth cannot come at the altar of awareness or sensationalism. The sanctity of fact anchors our understanding of reality; devoid of it, we are adrift in an ocean of confusion and misinformation.

In the dust settled after the Poonam Pandey debacle, the contours of a new discourse have emerged, harboring vital interrogations. How do we balance the drive for poignant awareness initiatives against the cardinal principle of truth? What mechanisms can ensure that health campaigns and their noble aspirations are not tainted by the allure of deception? Addressing these queries is not a solitary task for policymakers or influencers but, indeed, a collective societal responsibility that will define our cultural ethics and the legacy we wish to preserve.

Conclusion 

As we contemplate the broader implications of this incident, let us not allow its sensational nature to eclipse the very real and pressing issue of cervical cancer—a condition that, beyond the glare of controversy, continues to shadow lives with its lethal silence. Instead, let our focus pivot towards tangible, truth-driven efforts aimed at education and empowerment. Truth, after all, is the beacon that dispels the murky shadows of ignorance and guides us toward enlightenment and healing.

References 

• https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/poonam-pandey-in-trouble-as-maharashtra-politician-seeks-case-for-faking-her-death-101707005742992.html
• https://www.nagpurtoday.in/state-mlc-tambe-demands-police-action-against-poonam-pandey-for-faking-her-death/02051417

‍

‍Introduction

‍

The misinformation crisis has evolved from being merely an abstract risk to a clear-cut and measurable danger to individuals, families, institutions and the whole information ecosystem. The recent death hoax with the famous actor Dharmendra is a perfect illustration of how the monster of falsehoods rises, conquers the world and does damage before the mechanisms of correction have a chance to operate. The first week of November 2025 saw the first wave of reports from different social media accounts and even some online news outlets that claimed Dharmendra had died at the age of 89. The news travelled like wildfire, causing confusion, grief and emotional suffering in large circles of fans, one could say the whole world. But then, the family came to the scene with the loudest, clearest, and most conclusive denial of them all. This case is not a one-time event. It is part of a cycle of misinformation that goes through the stages from one unverified claim to the next due to the emotional value, the virality of platforms, and the accelerating online engagement.

‍

How One Wrong Post Can Create Worry and Fear

‍

This kind of false news spreads fast on social media because people share emotional posts without checking the source, and automated accounts often repeat the same claim which makes it look true. Such hoaxes create fear, sadness and stress for fans, and they place sudden pressure on the family who must deal with public worry at a time when they need calm and privacy. The message shared by Hema Malini who is the wife of the actor shows how hurtful and careless misinformation can be, and it reminds everyone that even one false post can create real emotional damage for many people.

‍

‍

Why This Hoax Spread So Quickly

‍

1. Sensationalism Drives Engagement: Rumours regarding the passing of a public figure, particularly someone who is universally loved, cause an immediate outburst of feelings. Such news is practically taken for granted by the online public, who are very likely to share it, most of the time without checking its authenticity, which, in turn, leads to viral spread. 
2. Very Fast Weaving-in on social media: Social media networks are very much made for swift sharing. Long before the official sources were able to either confirm or dismiss the matter, posts, reels, and messages ripped through the networks.
3. Digital Users Not Verifying Source: A large part of the audience depends on screenshots, forwards, and unverified posts for keeping up with the news. This opens a very nice environment for the spreading of hoaxes. 
4. Weak Verification Protocols: Although there have been measures to inform the public about misinformation, most news companies still give priority to the speed of reporting rather than its correctness, though not all the time, especially for the more entertaining and attractive topics like the health or death of famous people. 
5. Algorithmic Amplification Risks: The engagement is mainly driven by algorithms that bring to the surface the posts that evoke strong emotions. In a way, it is very unfair because the false or sensational claims are getting in front at the same time as the corrective updates, hence, the public is getting misled. In the absence of algorithmic safeguards, misinformation is on the rise and becoming stronger.

‍

Best Practices For Users: 

‍

• Make sure to verify before sharing, especially if the topic is about health or death. 
• Get updates by following official accounts rather than through sharing of viral forwards. 
• Be aware of the emotional manipulation tactics used in misleading information. 

Conclusion

‍

The rumour surrounding Dharmendra's death is yet another example that misinformation, whether promptly corrected or not, can still inflict distress, cause loss of trust and damage to reputation. It also emphasises the need for stronger information governance, responsible digital journalism, and platform intervention mechanisms as a matter of urgency. This incident, from clicks to consequences, points to a basic truth: misinformation in the digital age is quicker to spread than facts, and the responsibility of putting a stop to it falls on all the stakeholders’ platforms, media, and users.

‍

References

‍

• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/esha-deol-and-hema-malini-dismiss-dharmendras-fake-death-news-relieved-fans-pray-for-actors-speedy-recovery-aap-jld-se-jld-apne-ghar-aye/articleshow/125242843.cms
• https://www.altnews.in/media-misreport-bollywood-actor-dharmendra-hasnt-passed-away-yet/
• https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/dharmendra-death-news-bollywoods-veeru-and-he-man-passes-away-at-89/articleshow/125238900.cms

‍