#FactCheck - AI-Generated Video of Monkey Falsely Linked to Hanuman Devotion

Introduction
‍

In May 2025, at Mumbai’s first-ever World Audio Visual and Entertainment Summit (WAVES), PM Narendra Modi marked a turning point: the rise of what he called India's Orange Economy. Here lies a new path to growth - one built less on factories, more on invention, artistry, and spreading thought globally. While aiming for massive economic scale, India finds its creative industries movies, sound, games, cartoons, clothing design, books, online media stepping forward. 

First appearing in a 2013 guide from the Inter-American Development Bank, the phrase 'orange economy' emerged through work by Felipe Buitrago Restrepo and Iván Duque Márquez, suggesting past neglect in defining how culture connects with economic activity. Because orange stands for imagination and heritage in many societies, it became the label for this particular sector of economic life..

According to UNESCO’s 2022 Global Report Reshaping Policies for Creativity, the cultural and creative sectors account for 3.1% of world GDP and employ 6.2% of the global workforce – more than the total number of people employed in car manufacturing in Europe, Japan and the U.S. Meanwhile, UNCTAD's 2024 Creative Economy Outlook shows cross-border trade in creative services hit $1.4 trillion in 2022, up nearly a third from five years ago, demonstrating how imagination is remaking modern commerce.

In his book The Creative Economy, economist John Howkins states that the creative economy is essentially about the relationship between creativity and economics, where ideas themselves are products, and imagination becomes a form of capital.

‍

India’s Slice of Orange 

‍

The Scale of Opportunity
‍

Despite its potential, India’s role in the global creative economy remains largely untapped. According to the FICCI-EY Media and Entertainment Report, the country’s media and entertainment sector ranks among the world’s most rapidly expanding, fueled by a youthful demographic that is increasingly online and earning more. Boasting over 600 million people using the internet, it hosts a vibrant network of creators - musicians in Guwahati, podcasters in Kochi, game developers in Bengaluru, filmmakers in Punjab - who together form a rich pool of talent unlike any other.

Now comes a shift at the WAVES Summit, where PM Modi framed content, creativity, and culture as core to an emerging economy. Not just products but ideas take center stage here, he suggested, during what he described as the ideal time to build from India for global impact. While earlier efforts pushed factory output under Make in India, this approach turned toward thinking work - where stories, visual forms, and online expression shape progress. Thought becomes product; imagination fuels industry.

‍

Creative Industries Leading Change
‍

What many people don’t know is that India makes more films than any other country. The films made in Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam or Kannada are also widely circulated outside India, not just the output of Mumbai. Streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon Prime carry these works, reaching far beyond local audiences. Furthermore, India’s gaming industry is nascent but growing rapidly, and is attracting increasing attention from policy makers. Until recently, studios around the world have not relied on Indian teams for animation and visual effects. Now, local creators are slowly building their own game franchises. Momentum is shifting - original ideas once rare now appear more often across the country. Deep within India’s craft traditions handwoven textiles, carved block patterns, intricate metallic threadwork lies a quiet fusion of legacy and modern expression. Viewed anew through the framework of creative enterprise, such practices reveal dual value: access to global markets alongside sustenance for village-based makers. Rather than mere relics, they function as living systems where art meets income. Changes in perception make them economic opportunities, rather than local crafts. Every stitch, every weave, is not just technique but the weight of continuity in the face of change. And today, streaming platforms allow independent musicians in India to connect directly to listeners worldwide.

‍

The Three T’s: Technology Talent Tolerance
‍

Richard Florida, an economist, in his work The Rise of the Creative Class once proposed a model where city progress ties closely to innovation, skilled individuals, and openness. His idea - crafted originally for U.S. urban areas fits well when viewing India today. Growth now depends less on old industries, more on environments that attract capable minds through flexibility. Regions thrive not just by building tech hubs but by welcoming diverse lifestyles. One factor feeds another: talent flows where freedom exists, ideas grow where tools are available. A place gains momentum only if it supports all three at once.

Technology

A tool opens doors. Low-cost internet, budget phones, together with government-backed digital expansion, made making content possible for nearly anyone. The focus should be on accessibility and last mile delivery. 

Talent

Home to the youngest population on Earth, it sees countless imaginative minds emerge yearly from schools that now encourage original thinking. Still, despite rising worldwide interest in what these individuals produce, many cannot cover basic needs - a gap highlighted by UNESCO’s 2022 findings. But this contradiction lacks for systems that ensure fair pay, protect ideas, and offer stability beyond fleeting projects.

Tolerance

Openness to difference, trial, and unusual thinking shapes the trickier part of the equation. The wide mix of tongues, beliefs, and cultural expressions in India adds real value. Still, fostering innovation demands systems willing to adapt with rules safeguarding free expression, fair access for women in arts sectors, smoother paths for excluded groups.

‍

Challenges on the Path to “Create in India”
‍

India has millions of creators who influence culture but struggle to make a regular income from their work. Platforms take the lion’s share of profits, but those creating content, especially outside the big cities, often don’t have legal help, fair contracts or links with brands.

Another issue is Intellectual Property Literacy, IP rules such as copyright, trademark and patent systems empower the creative economy. Still, uneven understanding and spotty enforcement across India put many creators at risk of unfair use. Surprisingly, UNESCO’s 2022 assessment points to missing global standards for measuring creative sectors. Because of this gap, India faces challenges in shaping precise policy moves. Without detailed cultural satellite accounts, tracking progress remains uneven. Sector-specific figures would help fill these blind spots. Otherwise, decisions rely on incomplete information.Lastly, across the world, female professionals in artistic fields hold fewer top roles while earning less than men - a gap clearly seen in India too. To shape a fairer cultural sector, intentional strategies must elevate women, indigenous makers, and creators with disabilities.

‍

Conclusion
‍

In India, where young energy meets tradition through digital tools. Stories once shared locally now move across borders, carried by platforms that turn art into income. Because of this shift, music and fashion gain reach but only if creators can protect their work. Without fair pay or legal backing, even brilliant ideas fade quietly. Support systems matter, not just ambition. Recognition from society shapes whether fresh voices endure. In 2022, UNESCO’s report showed that although more people want to do creative work, those who create it still find it hard to make a living. New ideas offer a way forward, not to copy what exists, culture is then voice and value all at once.

‍

References
‍

1. https://sprf.in/from-make-in-india-to-create-in-india-charting-indias-orange-economy-frontier/ 
2. https://www.unesco.org/reports/reshaping-creativity/2022/en 
3. https://iasscore.in/current-affairs/indias-orange-economy 
4. https://indiasworld.in/the-dawn-of-indias-orange-economy/ 
5. Marta-Christina Suciu, "The Creative Economy" (Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest)
6. John Howkins, The Creative Economy: How People Make Money from Ideas (2001)
7. Richard Florida, The Rise of the Creative Class (2002)
8. UNCTAD, Creative Economy Outlook 2024
9. SPRF, "From Make in India to Create in India" (December 2025)
10. IDB, The Orange Economy: An Infinite Opportunity (2013)

‍

Introduction
‍

The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITy) released the Draft Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Second Amendment Rules, 2026 on March 30, 2026, inviting public comments with a response window closing on April 14. This is a limited 15-day period for public input on proposed rules that will have major constitutional impacts. The brevity and timing of this opportunity demonstrate debatable commitment to stakeholder engagement and meaningful consultation by the drafting agency.

While MEITY describes the proposed amendments as "clarificatory and procedural nature," an analysis shows they will have substantive effects. Collectively, the amended language changes significantly how online speech will be regulated in India by providing the executive with more concentrated regulatory authority, limiting the required transparency of content enforcement, mandating greater retention of data without proportionality-based safeguards, and placing excessive compliance burden on intermediaries. Each of these changes has consequences beyond just changes in process and together, these changes collectively raise substantial concerns regarding compliance with Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India.

‍

The Constitutional Baseline: Shreya Singhal and the Limits of Intermediary Liability
‍

India’s Supreme Court decision in Shreya Singhal v Union of India (2015) 5 SCC 1 provides the foundation for intermediary liability, wherein the Court read down Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act, 2000, holding that intermediaries are required to act upon receiving actual knowledge only through a court order or a valid notification by the appropriate government authority. The Supreme Court’s decision intended to provide a constitutional protection to intermediaries from being subjected to informal, unverified executive pressure to take down content by requiring that any such order be subject to some level of legal objective credibility or threshold.

‍

Rule 3(4) of the proposed amendments places that balance under significant strain. By requiring intermediaries to comply with advisories, directions, standard operating procedures, codes of practice, and guidelines issued by the Ministry — and tying non-compliance to the loss of safe harbour — the draft effectively lowers the constitutional threshold that Shreya Singhal was designed to maintain. Compliance obligations now potentially arise from instruments that carry no judicial sanction and no mandatory public disclosure.

‍

Rule 3(4): Delegated Legislation or Executive Overreach
‍

The rule-making power conferred on the Central Government under Section 87 of the IT Act is limited to carrying out the provisions of the Act. It does not authorise the creation of new substantive obligations. This principle has been consistently affirmed in Indian Express Newspapers v. Union of India (1985) 1 SCC 641 and Confederation of Ex-Servicemen Associations v. Union of India (2006) 8 SCC 399, where the Court held that delegated legislation must remain within the four corners of the parent statute.

Rule 3(4) tests those limits. It converts executive advisories into binding compliance instruments without a clear statutory foundation in either Section 79 or Section 87. Although the proposed rule requires that such instruments specify their legal basis, there is no requirement that they be published or made publicly accessible. This creates a framework in which legality risks becoming circular — instruments claimed to be lawful solely by reference to a provision that does not clearly authorise them, shielded from scrutiny by their own opacity. Justice Chandurkar’s judgment in Kunal Kamra v. Union of India identified precisely this defect in the Fact Check Unit amendment. Rule 3(4) replicates the structural problem in a broader form.

‍

Compliance Pressure and the Logic of Over-Censorship
‍

The practical consequence of Rule 3(4) lies not only in its legality but in how it reshapes incentive structures for platforms. An intermediary facing the permanent threat of safe harbour loss will not wait to assess the legal merit of each advisory. The rational calculation is to comply early, broadly, and without friction. Lawful content — particularly satire, political commentary, and journalism — becomes vulnerable not because it is unlawful, but because it presents regulatory risk.

This dynamic was visible on 18 March 2026, when stand-up comedian Pulkit Mani (@hunnywhoisfunny) found his satirical Instagram reel being restricted across India. The video had accumulated over 16.5 million views. Users encountered a notice citing Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act. No reasons were publicly provided. No prior hearing was offered. The same night, several political parody and satire accounts were withheld on X. 

‍

Data Retention, Privacy, and the Proportionality Test
‍

The amendments to Rules 3(1)(g) and 3(1)(h) extend data retention obligations by making them additional to requirements under any other law. The existing 180-day floor for retained user data — covering removed content, registration information, and associated records — becomes a minimum rather than a ceiling. No maximum is specified, and no proportionality requirement accompanies the extension.

‍

This raises direct concerns under Article 21 as interpreted in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) 10 SCC 1, which held that any state intrusion into privacy must satisfy the triple test of legality, necessity, and proportionality. Undefined retention periods, with no statutory ceiling and no requirement of purpose limitation, risk failing all three. The longer user data is held, including metadata, device information, and records of removed content,  the greater the exposure to surveillance, unauthorised access, and use beyond the original justification.

‍

Circumventing Judicial Scrutiny Through Procedural Redesign
‍

The Bombay High Court, in its August 2021 order, stayed provisions of the IT Rules’ oversight mechanism as prima facie violative of Article 19(1)(a). The Madras High Court in T.M. Krishna v. Union of India affirmed that stay, cautioning that government-controlled media oversight risked undermining press independence. Both matters remain pending before the Delhi High Court.

The amendments to Rules 8(1) and 14 restructure the same oversight machinery through a modified procedural design. By extending the Inter-Departmental Committee’s jurisdiction to cover “matters” referred by the Ministry with no requirement of a complainant, no defined subject matter, and no guaranteed prior hearing, the proposed rules effectively reconstitute what courts found constitutionally suspect. Individual users posting news and current affairs content are now brought within reach of blocking mechanisms originally designed for institutional publishers.

‍

Conclusion
‍

As seen above, the Draft IT Rules 2026 are unable to meet the constitutional and judicial requirements to regulate free speech. What the proposed amendments construct is a durable system in which platforms self-censor under liability pressure, data is retained without proportionate justification, and content oversight expands through procedural adjustment rather than parliamentary legislation. Regulation of the digital public sphere is both legitimate and necessary. But it must be anchored in law, not in the quiet authority of executive advisories. The law must ultimately remain anchored in constitutional values, guided by the enduring principles of justice, equity, and good conscience.

‍

The comment period closes on 14 April 2026. 

Submissions may be sent to itrules.consultation@meity.gov.in.

‍

References
‍

1. https://www.meity.gov.in/static/uploads/2026/03/30591fc6e322dcbcc9dae84a0f02e9e7.pdf 
2. https://www.meity.gov.in/static/uploads/2026/03/a71a21d35c107f2e528363d3eb17646a.pdf 
3. https://www.meity.gov.in/static/uploads/2026/02/550681ab908f8afb135b0ad42816a1c9.pdf 
4. https://neopolitico.com/india/government-blocks-viral-satirical-reel-impersonating-pm-modi-raising-fresh-questions-on-free-speech-and-digital-regulation/
5. https://internetfreedom.in/sound-the-alarm-iffs-first-read-on-meitys-draft-it-rules-second-amendment-2026/ 

‍

Executive Summary
‍

A video circulating widely on social media claims to show a pilot of the Indian Air Force (IAF) crying and expressing fear about flying fighter jets, allegedly citing poor maintenance and frequent crashes. The clip is being linked to the crash of an IAF Sukhoi-30 fighter jet in Assam on March 5, in which two pilots lost their lives. In the viral video, a man dressed like a pilot is seen speaking emotionally, saying that flying fighter jets has become frightening due to lack of maintenance and repeated accidents. Several users are sharing the clip claiming that the man in the video is an IAF pilot revealing the reality behind aircraft crashes. However, research by the CyberPeace found the claim to be false. The video does not depict a real pilot or an actual incident. Instead, it appears to be an AI-generated clip created and circulated with the intent to spread misinformation.

‍

Claim:

‍

An Instagram user, ‘samacharsaar0’, shared the viral video on March 10, 2026, with the English caption: “2300 aircraft crashes, 1300 pilots dead: A major challenge before the IAF.”

• Source: :https://www.instagram.com/reel/DVqa4lNiYJQ 
• Archived link::https://perma.cc/EUZ8-DHE3 

‍

‍

Fact Check:

‍

The claim was also debunked by PIB Fact Check. While verifying the viral video, PIB clarified that the clip is artificially generated and not related to any real IAF personnel.

To further verify the authenticity of the video, we analyzed it using AI detection tools. The tool Hive Moderation indicated a 99.9% probability that the video was generated using artificial intelligence.

‍

‍

We also examined the clip using another AI detection platform, Undetectable. The analysis suggested an 82% likelihood that the video was created with AI tools. The tool also indicated the possibility that the footage may have been generated using the Sora AI video generation tool.

‍

‍

Conclusion
‍

Our research  concludes that the viral video of a crying “pilot” is not authentic. The clip has been created using artificial intelligence and is being misleadingly shared as a real Indian Air Force pilot speaking about aircraft crashes. The government has also denied the claim associated with the video.

‍