#FactCheck: A digitally altered video of actor Sebastian Stan shows him changing a ‘Tell Modi’ poster to one that reads ‘I Told Modi’ on a display panel.
Executive Summary:
A widely circulated video claiming to feature a poster with the words "I Told Modi" has gone viral, improperly connecting it to the April 2025 Pahalgam attack, in which terrorists killed 26 civilians. The altered Marvel Studios clip is allegedly a mockery of Operation Sindoor, the counterterrorism operation India initiated in response to the attack. This misinformation emphasizes how crucial it is to confirm information before sharing it online by disseminating misleading propaganda and drawing attention away from real events.
Claim:
A man can be seen changing a poster that says "Tell Modi" to one that says "I Told Modi" in a widely shared viral video. This video allegedly makes reference to Operation Sindoor in India, which was started in reaction to the Pahalgam terrorist attack on April 22, 2025, in which militants connected to The Resistance Front (TRF) killed 26 civilians.
Fact check:
Further research, we found the original post from Marvel Studios' official X handle, confirming that the circulating video has been altered using AI and does not reflect the authentic content.
By using Hive Moderation to detect AI manipulation in the video, we have determined that this video has been modified with AI-generated content, presenting false or misleading information that does not reflect real events.
Furthermore, we found a Hindustan Times article discussing the mysterious reveal involving Hollywood actor Sebastian Stan.
Conclusion:
It is untrue to say that the "I Told Modi" poster is a component of a public demonstration. The text has been digitally changed to deceive viewers, and the video is manipulated footage from a Marvel film. The content should be ignored as it has been identified as false information.
- Claim: Viral social media posts confirm a Pakistani military attack on India.
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Related Blogs
Introduction
A policy, no matter how artfully conceived, is like a timeless idiom, its truth self-evident, its purpose undeniable, standing in silent witness before those it vows to protect, yet trapped in the stillness of inaction, where every moment of delay erodes the very justice it was meant to serve. This is the case of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, which holds in its promise a resolution to all the issues related to data protection and a protection framework at par with GDPR and Global Best Practices. While debates on its substantive efficacy are inevitable, its execution has emerged as a site of acute contention. The roll-out and the decision-making have been making headlines since late July on various fronts. The government is being questioned by industry stakeholders, media and independent analysts on certain grounds, be it “slow policy execution”, “centralisation of power” or “arbitrary amendments”. The act is now entrenched in a never-ending dilemma of competing interests under the DPDP Act.
The change to the Right to Information Act (RTI), 2005, made possible by Section 44(3) of the DPDP Act, has become a focal point of debate. This amendment is viewed by some as an attack on weakening the hard-won transparency architecture of Indian democracy by substituting an absolute exemption for personal information for the “public interest override” in Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.
The Lag Ledger: Tracking the Delays in DPDP Enforcement
As per a news report of July 28, 2025, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Information and Communications Technology has expressed its concern over the delayed implementation and has urged the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) to ensure that data privacy is adequately ensured in the nation. In the report submitted to the Lok Sabha on July 24, the committee reviewed the government’s reaction to the previous recommendations and concluded that MeitY had only been able to hold nine consultations and twenty awareness workshops about the Draft DPDP Rules, 2025. In addition, four brainstorming sessions with academic specialists were conducted to examine the needs for research and development. The ministry acknowledges that this is a specialised field that urgently needs industrial involvement. Another news report dated 30th July, 2025, of a day-long consultation held where representatives from civil society groups, campaigns, social movements, senior lawyers, retired judges, journalists, and lawmakers participated on the contentious and chilling effects of the Draft Rules that were notified in January this year. The organisers said in a press statement the DPDP Act may have a negative impact on the freedom of the press and people’s right to information and the activists, journalists, attorneys, political parties, groups and organisations “who collect, analyse, and disseminate critical information as they become ‘data fiduciaries’ under the law.”
The DPDP Act has thus been caught up in an uncomfortable paradox: praised as a significant legislative achievement for India’s digital future, but caught in a transitional phase between enactment and enforcement, where every day not only postpones protection but also feeds worries about the dwindling amount of room for accountability and transparency.
The Muzzling Effect: Diluting Whistleblower Protections
The DPDP framework raises a number of subtle but significant issues, one of which is the possibility that it would weaken safeguards for whistleblowers. Critics argue that the Act runs the risk of trapping journalists, activists, and public interest actors who handle sensitive material while exposing wrongdoing because it expands the definition of “personal data” and places strict compliance requirements on “data fiduciaries.”One of the most important checks on state overreach may be silenced if those who speak truth to power are subject to legal retaliation in the absence of clear exclusions of robust public-interest protections.
Noted lawyer Prashant Bhushan has criticised the law for failing to protect whistleblowers, warning that “If someone exposes corruption and names officials, they could now be prosecuted for violating the DPDP Act.”
Consent Management under the DPDP Act
In June 2025, the National e-Governance Division (NeGD) under MeitY released a Business Requirement Document (BRD) for developing consent management systems under the DPDP Act, 2023. The document supports the idea of “Consent Manager”, which acts as a single point of contact between Data Principals and Data Fiduciaries. This idea is fundamental to the Act, which is now being operationalised with the help of MeitY’s “Code for Consent: The DPDP Innovation Challenge.” The government has established a collaborative ecosystem to construct consent management systems (CMS) that can serve as a single, standardised interface between Data Principals and Data Fiduciaries by choosing six distinct entities, such as Jio Platforms, IDfy, and Zoop. Such a framework could enable people to have meaningful control over their personal data, lessen consent fatigue, and move India’s consent architecture closer to international standards if it is implemented precisely and transparently.
There is no debate to the importance of this development however, there are various concerns associated with this advancement that must be considered. Although effective, a centralised consent management system may end up being a single point of failure in terms of political overreach and technical cybersecurity flaws. Concerns are raised over the concentration of power over the framing, seeking, and recording of consent when big corporate entities like Jio are chosen as key innovators. Critics contend that the organisations responsible for generating revenue from user data should not be given the responsibility for designing the gatekeeping systems. Furthermore, the CMS can create opaque channels for data access, compromising user autonomy and whistleblower protections, in the absence of strong safeguards, transparency mechanisms and independent oversight.
Conclusion
Despite being hailed as a turning point in India’s digital governance, the DPDP Act is still stuck in a delayed and unequal transition from promise to reality. Its goals are indisputable, but so are the conundrum it poses to accountability, openness, and civil liberties. Every delay increases public mistrust, and every safeguard that remains unsolved. The true test of a policy intended to safeguard the digital rights of millions lies not in how it was drafted, but in the integrity, pace, and transparency with which it is to be implemented. In the digital age, the true cost of delay is measured not in time, but in trust. CyberPeace calls for transparent, inclusive, and timely execution that balances innovation with the protection of digital rights.
References
- https://www.storyboard18.com/how-it-works/parliamentary-committee-raises-concern-with-meity-over-dpdp-act-implementation-lag-77105.htm
- https://thewire.in/law/excessive-centralisation-of-power-lawyers-activists-journalists-mps-express-fear-on-dpdp-act
- https://www.medianama.com/2025/08/223-jio-idfy-meity-consent-management-systems-dpdpa/
- https://www.downtoearth.org.in/governance/centre-refuses-to-amend-dpdp-act-to-protect-journalists-whistleblowers-and-rti-activists
Introduction
In the age of social media, the news can spread like wildfire. A recent viral claim contained that police have started a nationwide scheme of free travel service for women at night. It stated that any woman who is alone and cannot find a vehicle to go home between 10 PM and 06 AM can contact the provided numbers and request a free vehicle. The viral message further contained the request to share and forward this information to everyone to get the women to know about the free vehicle service offered by police at night. However, upon fact check the claim was found to be misleading.
Social Impact of Misleading Information
The fact that such misleading information gets viral at a fast speed is because of its ability to impact and influence people through emotional resonance. Especially during a time when women's safety is a topic discussed in media sensationalism due to recently highlighted rape or sexual violence incidents, such fake viral claims often spark widespread public concern, causing emotional resonance to people and they unknowingly share or forward such messages in the spike of emotional and sensational appeal contained in such messages. The emotional nature of these viral texts often overrides scepticism, leading to immediate sharing without verification.
Such nature of viral messages often tends to bring people to protest, raise awareness and create support networks, but in spite of emotional resonance people get targeted by misinformation and become the unintended superspreaders of fake news fueled by emotional and social media-driven reactions. Women’s safety in society is a sensitive topic and when people discover such viral claims to be misleading and fake, it often hurts the sentiments of society leading to significant social impacts, including distrust in social media, unnecessary panic and confusion.
CyberPeace Policy Vertical Advisory for Social Media Users
- Think before Sharing: All netizens must practice caution while sharing anything and double-check its authenticity before sharing/forwarding or reposting it on your social media stories.
- Don't be unintended superspreaders of Misinformation: Misinformation with emotional resonance and widespread sharing by netizens can lead to them becoming "superspreaders of misinformation" and making it viral quickly. Hence you must avoid such unintended consequences by following the best practices of being vigilant and informed by reliable sources.
- Exercise vigilance and scepticism: It is important that netizens exercise vigilance and they build cognitive abilities to recognise the red flags of misleading information. You can do so by following the official communication channels, looking for any discrepancy in the content of susceptible information and double-checking its authenticity before sharing it with anyone.
- Verify the information from official sources: Follow the official communication channels of concerned authorities for any kind of information, circulars, notifications etc. In case of finding any piece of information to be susceptible or misleading, intimate it to the relevant authority and the fact-checking organizations.
- Stay in touch with expert organizations: Cybersecurity experts and civil society organisations possess the unique blend of large-scale impact potential and technical expertise. Netizens can stay updated about recent developments in the tech-policy sphere and learn about internet best practices, and measures to counter misinformation through methods such as prebunking, debunking and more.
Connect with CyberPeace
As an expert organisation, we have the ability to educate and empower huge numbers, along with the skills and policy acumen needed to be able to not just make people aware of the problem but also teach them how to solve it for themselves. At CyberPeace we regularly produce fact-check reports, blogs & advisories, and insights on prebunking & debunking measures and capacity-building programs with the aim of empowering netizens at the heart of our initiatives. CyberPeace has established the largest network of CyberPeace Corps volunteers globally. These volunteers play a crucial role in assisting victims, raising awareness, and promoting proactive measures.
References:
Executive Summary:
A photoshopped image circulating online suggests Prime Minister Narendra Modi met with militant leader Hafiz Saeed. The actual photograph features PM Modi greeting former Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif during a surprise diplomatic stopover in Lahore on December 25, 2015.
The Claim:
A widely shared image on social media purportedly shows PM Modi meeting Hafiz Saeed, a declared terrorist. The claim implies Modi is hostile towards India or aligned with terrorists.
Fact Check:
On our research and reverse image search we found that the Press Information Bureau (PIB) had tweeted about the visit on 25 December 2015, noting that PM Narendra Modi was warmly welcomed by then-Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharif in Lahore. The tweet included several images from various angles of the original meeting between Modi and Sharif. On the same day, PM Modi also posted a tweet stating he had spoken with Nawaz Sharif and extended birthday wishes. Additionally, no credible reports of any meeting between Modi and Hafiz Saeed, further validating that the viral image is digitally altered.
In our further research we found an identical photo, with former Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in place of Hafiz Saeed. This post was shared by Hindustan Times on X on 26 December 2015, pointing to the possibility that the viral image has been manipulated.
Conclusion:
The viral image claiming to show PM Modi with Hafiz Saeed is digitally manipulated. A reverse image search and official posts from the PIB and PM Modi confirm the original photo was taken during Modi’s visit to Lahore in December 2015, where he met Nawaz Sharif. No credible source supports any meeting between Modi and Hafiz Saeed, clearly proving the image is fake.
- Claim: Debunking the Edited Image Claim of PM Modi with Hafiz Saeed
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
