#FactCheck-16-Year-Old Bronx Fire Rescue Video Misrepresented as Lucknow Incident
Executive Summary
A video is being widely shared on social media after a fire incident in Aliganj, Lucknow. The approximately 15-second clip shows a building engulfed in flames, where a woman is seen hanging her small child outside a window while desperately seeking help. The video is being circulated as if it shows the recent Lucknow fire incident. CyberPeace Research Wing research found the claim to be misleading. The viral video is not related to the Lucknow fire incident. In fact, the clip is around 16 years old and originates from a completely different incident in the United States. It is being falsely shared on social media with a misleading context.
Claim:
A Facebook user shared the viral video on June 22, 2026, claiming: “A mother’s love is so powerful that even in front of death, she goes to any extent to save her child.” The post link, archived link, and screenshots are provided below.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1168968548755052
Factcheck
To verify the claim, we conducted a reverse image search of the video keyframes using Google Lens. During the research, we found the same visuals published in a HuffPost report dated 2010. According to the report, the incident shows a fire in an apartment in the Bronx, New York, USA. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/photo-captures-baby-dangl_n_463780
Further research led us to another report published by Gothamist in 2010, which also confirmed that the footage is related to a fire incident in the Bronx apartment building in New York. https://gothamist.com/news/baby-held-out-window-in-bronx-fire-is-healthy-adorable
According to a report by Dainik Bhaskar, a fire incident at a coaching center in Aliganj, Lucknow resulted in the death of around 15 people. The government suspended four officials and police arrested four accused in connection with the incident. However, it was confirmed that the actual footage from the Lucknow coaching center fire is different from the viral video and has no relation to it. https://www.bhaskar.com/local/uttar-pradesh/lucknow/news/lucknow-coaching-center-fire-children-rescue-effort-138258629.html
Conclusion:
Our research confirms that the viral video is not related to the Lucknow fire incident. The footage is actually from a 16-year-old fire incident in the Bronx, New York, USA, and is being falsely shared with a misleading context on social media.
Related Blogs
Executive Summary
A video is being widely shared on social media with the claim that it shows the aftermath of a recent Israeli attack on Iran. The footage shows multiple residential high-rise buildings engulfed in flames, with thick plumes of smoke rising into the sky. Users sharing the video claim that Israel carried out more than 500 airstrikes on Iran. CyberPeace Research Wingresearch found the claim to be misleading. The viral video is not related to any Israeli attack on Iran. It actually shows a massive fire that broke out in a residential complex in Hong Kong in November 2025.
Claim:
An X user shared the viral video and wrote, “Israel has carried out more than 500 surgical strikes on Iran in the last 24 hours. Enjoying it thoroughly. Keep it up.”
Post link, archive link and screenshot can be seen below:
https://x.com/ocjain4/status/2064715707997413618?s=20
Fact Check:
To verify the authenticity of the viral video, we extracted keyframes and conducted a Google Lens search. During the research, we found the same footage on Reuters’ website, where it had been published on November 26, 2025.
Report link and screenshot can be seen below:
https://www.reuters.com/video/watch/idRW511126112025RP1/
According to Reuters, the video shows a massive fire that engulfed multiple high-rise residential buildings in Hong Kong’s northern Tai Po district. The blaze claimed the lives of at least four people. Thick smoke could be seen billowing from the buildings as firefighters and emergency response teams worked to bring the fire under control.
After establishing the source of the video, we conducted a keyword search on Google and found a report published by NDTV on November 27, 2025, which also covered the incident.
Report link and screenshot can be seen below:
Conclusion:
Our research found that the viral video is not related to any Israeli attack on Iran. The footage actually shows a massive fire that broke out in residential buildings in Hong Kong in November 2025. Chinese President Xi Jinping had expressed condolences to the victims, including a firefighter who lost his life while on duty.
Executive Summary
A video is being widely circulated on social media showing thousands of drones forming an image of Cristiano Ronaldo wearing his iconic Portugal jersey over what appears to be a water body. Moments later, the drones are seen creating his famous “SIUUU” celebration pose. The video is being shared with the claim that this spectacular aerial drone show was organised as a tribute to Ronaldo.
CyberPeace Research Wing’s research found the viral claim to be false. The research revealed that the video is not a real drone display but was created using Artificial Intelligence (AI) and is being circulated with a misleading claim.
Claim
The viral video is being shared on social media with the claim that the drone show was organised in honour of Cristiano Ronaldo.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DamaeegILpU/?igsh=NmtjOTN4cWJzenJ1
Fact Check
To verify the claim, we extracted multiple keyframes from the viral video and conducted a reverse image search using Google Lens. During the research, we did not find any credible video, news report, or reliable source confirming that such a drone show was organised for Cristiano Ronaldo.
In the next stage of the research, we analysed the video using the AI detection tool Hive Moderation. The tool’s results indicated that the viral video had a 71% probability of being AI-generated.
For further verification, we checked the video using another AI detection tool, DetectVideo AI. The analysis showed that the video had an 80% probability of being AI-generated.
At the final stage of the research, the video was also analysed using Deepfake-O-Meter. The tool indicated an almost 100% probability that the video was AI-generated.
Conclusion
Our research found that the viral claim is false. The video does not show a real drone show organised in honour of Cristiano Ronaldo. The footage was found to be AI-generated and is being circulated on social media with a false narrative.
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
