#FactCheck - AI-Generated Image Falsely Shows Mohammed Siraj Offering Namaz During Net Practice
A photo circulating on social media claims to show Indian cricketer Mohammed Siraj offering namaz during net practice, while teammates Rohit Sharma, Virat Kohli and Shubman Gill are seen taking a selfie with him. Several users are sharing the image as a “beautiful moment,” portraying it as a symbol of faith, unity and sportsmanship. However, research by the Cyber Peace Foundation has found that the viral image is not genuine and has been AI-generated.
Claim
On January 14, 2026, multiple Facebook users shared the viral image with captions describing it as a touching scene from Rajkot’s Saurashtra Stadium. The posts claim that Mohammed Siraj took time out during net practice to offer prayers, reflecting his strong faith, while fellow cricketers Rohit Sharma, Virat Kohli and Shubman Gill respectfully captured the moment on camera.
Users praised the image as a rare blend of spirituality, discipline, teamwork and mutual respect, calling it a “beautiful confluence of sport and faith.”(Links to the post, archived version and screenshots are provided below.)
Fact Check:
On closely examining the viral image, several visual inconsistencies and unnatural elements were observed, raising suspicion that the picture may not be authentic.To verify this, the Cyber Peace Foundation analysed the image using the AI detection tool Hive Moderation. According to the tool’s assessment, the image showed a 99% likelihood of being AI-generated.
To further strengthen the verification, the image was also scanned using another AI detection platform, Sightengine. The results indicated a 96% probability that the image was generated using artificial intelligence.
Conclusion:
The research confirms that the viral image claiming to show Mohammed Siraj offering namaz during net practice, with Rohit Sharma, Virat Kohli and Shubman Gill taking a selfie, is not real.The photograph has been created using AI tools and falsely shared on social media, misleading users by presenting a fabricated scene as an authentic moment.
Related Blogs
Introduction
In April 2026, there was a fascinating example of the risks of generative artificial intelligence (AI). An Indian medical student, aged 22, developed a fake AI-driven influencer "Emily Hart" and leveraged the persona to amass a substantial social media following, engagement and revenue.
It isn't just a case of online fraud. It is a turning point in the nature of influence, veracity, and profitability in the digital world. Ultimately, it poses a troubling question. If users can't tell the difference between real and fake people, then what is online trust?
The Making of a Synthetic Influencer
“Emily Hart” was a young, conservative American nurse. The identity was completely made-up, created with the help of AI programs that produced eerily realistic images, captions and engagement techniques.
The creator did not work with random content. They crafted the influencer to cater to a particular audience. With this in mind, the account was able to target conservatives in the United States who are politically active. It is reported that some of its posts have achieved millions of views, and within a few months, the influencer had thousands of followers.
Monetisation followed naturally. The account owner monetised through subscriptions and the sale of merchandise, reportedly earning thousands of dollars a month with fewer than an hour a day of "work" on the account.
The disproportionate effort and reward is what is interesting about this case. This is a unique example of how people can now use very little capital to create digital personas that attract value.
Why It Worked: Engagement, Identity, and Algorithmic Incentives
The "Emily Hart" case was no accident. It was enabled by three complementary factors.
First, identity targeting was crucial. The persona was constructed to fit a particular worldview and culture, making it more relevant and resonating with the target audience. AI platforms were even deployed to better target and position the persona, and it is suggested that micro-targeting would increase engagement.
Second, it was amplified by algorithms. Social media algorithms favour engagement, sometimes favouring emotional and divisive content. The account exploited this by producing visually appealing content with a strong political message, what the creator called "engageable" content.
Third, the authenticity of the AI content minimised distrust. Generative models have become so realistic that it is hard to tell if images are real or not. Specialists point out that AI increases the credibility and scalability of fake profiles, increasing their influence and reach.
All of this combined to make deception profitable.
The Blurring of Authenticity in Digital Spaces
The "Emily Hart" phenomenon is emblematic of a broader shift in authenticity. Historically, influence was correlated with human personalities who establish trust over time. But AI upends this paradigm by allowing the creation of entirely fabricated personalities capable of mimicking, and even surpassing, human influencers.
This has two immediate consequences.
First, the truth is harder to discern. While platforms might require that AI-generated content be disclosed, there are inconsistencies in how this is policed. Here, the account apparently didn't disclose until it was banned for fraud.
Second, authenticity may not be as important to consumers. Consumers may view content for ideological or emotional reasons, rather than for its accuracy. This indicates that the rise of synthetic influencers is not just a technical problem but also a behavioural one.
The implication is stark. The internet is evolving into a place where authenticity is more important than truth.
Economic Incentives and the Rise of Synthetic Monetisation
The key difference between this fraud and previous ones is the business model. This creator didn't break into a computer or steal personal information. He cultivated an audience and sold attention.
This is an example of how the internet economy works. Attention is a commodity and platforms aim to generate it. AI reduces the cost of creating attention-generating artefacts, enabling people to amplify their reach.
This gives rise to synthetic monetisation. Online characters can be developed, fine-tuned and leveraged as money-spinning assets. In this case, identity is a product.
This raises regulatory challenges. Current laws on fraud, advertising and consumer protection may not be sufficient to cover cases of deceptive content sourced from an identity.
Platform Responsibility and Enforcement Gaps
The role of platforms in enabling such scenarios cannot be overlooked. Although platforms have policy guidelines on disclosure of AI-generated content, these are inconsistently applied.
In the case of "Emily Hart", the account apparently existed for some time before being shut down for scamming. This implies that either the ability to detect such accounts is weak or the tools used are reactive.
The challenge is structural. Companies are rewarded for engagement, and fake accounts can help to achieve this. But they must also promote authenticity and protect against fraud.
This presents a challenge between commercial interests and user safety. Without enforcement, synthetic influencers will become more prevalent.
Policy Implications: Rethinking Trust and Verification
The "Emily Hart" incident highlights a number of policy issues.
First, disclosure policies must be improved and harmonised. Consumers need to be clear when content is generated by AI, and platforms need to police this.
Second, identity verification needs to be updated. Classic forms of verification may not hold up in an era of imaginary characters amassing legions of fans. Alternative digital verification may be needed.
Third, new regulations should apply to synthetic identities. This means clarifying distinctions between art, commerce and fraud.
Finally, digital literacy becomes critical. Consumers need to be equipped to operate in a space where virtual personas aren't always human.
Conclusion
The rise of "Emily Hart" is not just an example of one person using AI to make money. It is a glimpse of a digital revolution.
AI is redefining how influence can be generated, trust can be established and value can be monetized. As digital personas become more realistic, the distinction between human and machine will remain unclear.
The challenge will not be to stop AI being used to generate content. It is to ensure that the systems that mediate our online interactions are able to tell the difference, and that we are not left on our own to sort it all out.
When anyone can make a convincing identity for themselves, trust will no longer be a given. It will need to be engineered, policed and protected.
Executive Summary
A video is being widely shared on social media and linked to protests that allegedly took place in Lucknow after the reported killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.Users claim that police in the capital of Uttar Pradesh baton-charged people who were protesting against the United States and Israel. The video is being widely circulated across social media platforms with this claim. However, research by CyberPeace found the claim to be false. Our verification revealed that the video is not from Lucknow but from Bareilly, and it is related to an incident that took place on September 26, 2025, when Uttar Pradesh Police baton-charged protesters during a rally held in support of the “I Love Mohammad” campaign.
Claim Post:
On March 3, 2026, an X (formerly Twitter) user shared the viral video claiming that the Uttar Pradesh Police took action against people blocking roads in Lucknow and creating unrest in support of Ali Khamenei.
Fact Check
To verify the claim, we extracted key frames from the viral video and conducted a reverse image search using Google Lens. During the search, we found a similar video posted on Instagram on September 26, 2025, indicating that the footage predates the current claim.
Further research led us to the same video on the website of Aaj Tak, where it was published on September 26, 2025.
According to the report, protests erupted in Bareilly after Friday prayers over a controversy related to “I Love Mohammad” posters. Hundreds of people took to the streets carrying banners and posters. The report further stated that protesters, responding to a call by cleric Maulana Tauqeer Raza, attempted to break police barricades and move forward. Police initially tried to persuade the crowd to disperse, but when the situation escalated and the crowd refused to back down, officers resorted to baton-charging to control the situation. The incident reportedly led to tension in the area.
Conclusion:
Our research found that the viral video being shared as police action on protesters in Lucknow after the alleged killing of Ali Khamenei is misleading. The footage is actually from Bareilly and shows a police baton-charge during a protest rally held on September 26, 2025 in support of the “I Love Mohammad” campaign.
Introduction
The 2025 Delhi Legislative Assembly election is just around the corner, scheduled for February 5, 2025, with all 70 constituencies heading to the polls. The eagerly awaited results will be announced on February 8, bringing excitement as the people of Delhi prepare to see their chosen leader take the helm as Chief Minister. As the election season unfolds, social media becomes a buzzing hub of activity, with information spreading rapidly across platforms. However, this period also sees a surge in online mis/disinformation, making elections a hotspot for misleading content. It is crucial for citizens to exercise caution and remain vigilant against false or deceptive online posts, videos, or content. Empowering voters to distinguish facts from fiction and recognize the warning signs of misinformation is essential to ensure informed decision-making. By staying alert and well-informed, we can collectively safeguard the integrity of the democratic process.
Risks of Mis/Disinformation
According to the 2024 survey report titled ‘Truth Be Told’ by ‘The 23 Watts’, 90% of Delhi’s youth (Gen Z) report witnessing a spike in fake news during elections, and 91% believe it influences voting patterns. Furthermore, the research highlights that 14% of Delhi’s youth tend to share sensational news without fact-checking, relying solely on conjecture.
Recent Measures by ECI
Recently the Election Commission of India (EC) has issued a fresh advisory to political parties to ensure responsible use of AI-generated content in their campaigns. The EC has issued guidelines to curb the potential use of "deepfakes" and AI-generated distorted content by political parties and their representatives to disturb the level playing field. EC has mandated the labelling of all AI-generated content used in election campaigns to enhance transparency, combat misinformation, ensuring a fair electoral process in the face of rapidly advancing AI technologies.
Best Practices to Avoid Electoral Mis/Disinformation
- Seek Information from Official Sources: Voters should rely on authenticated sources for information. These include reading official manifestos, following verified advisory notifications from the Election Commission, and avoiding unverified claims or rumours.
- Consume News Responsibly: Voters must familiarize themselves with dependable news channels and make use of reputable fact-checking organizations that uphold the integrity of news content. It is crucial to refrain from randomly sharing or forwarding any news post, video, or message without verifying its authenticity. Consume responsibly, fact-check thoroughly, and share cautiously.
- Role of Fact-Checking: Cross-checking and verifying information from credible sources are indispensable practices. Reliable and trustworthy fact-checking tools are vital for assessing the authenticity of information in the digital space. Voters are encouraged to use these tools to validate information from authenticated sources and adopt a habit of verification on their own. This approach fosters a culture of critical thinking, empowering citizens to counter deceptive deepfakes and malicious misinformation effectively. It also helps create a more informed and resilient electorate.
- Be Aware of Electoral Deepfakes: In the era of artificial intelligence, synthetic media presents significant challenges. Just as videos can be manipulated, voices can also be cloned. It is essential to remain vigilant against the misuse of deepfake audio and video content by malicious actors. Recognize the warning signs, such as inconsistencies or unnatural details, and stay alert to misleading multimedia content. Proactively question and verify such material to avoid falling prey to deception.
References
- https://www.financialexpress.com/business/brandwagon-90-ofnbsp-delhi-youth-witness-spike-in-fake-news-during-elections-91-believe-it-influences-voting-patterns-revealed-the-23-watts-report-3483166/
- https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/election-commission-urges-parties-to-disclose-ai-generated-campaign-content-in-interest-of-transparency/articleshow/117306865.cms
- https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/election-commission-issues-advisory-on-use-of-ai-in-poll-campaigning/article69103888.ece
- https://indiaai.gov.in/article/election-commission-of-india-embraces-ai-ethics-in-campaigning-advisory-on-labelling-ai-generated-content
