#FactCheck-Air Taxi is a prototype and is not launched to commercial public
Executive Summary:
Recent reports circulating on various social media platforms have falsely claimed that an air taxi prototype is operational and providing services between Amritsar, Chandigarh, Delhi, and Jaipur. These claims, accompanied by images and videos, have been widely shared, leading to significant public attention. However, upon conducting a thorough examination using reverse image search, it has been determined that the information is misleading and inaccurate. These assertions do not reflect the current reality and are not substantiated by credible sources
Claim:
The claim suggests that an air taxi prototype is already operational, servicing routes between Amritsar, Chandigarh, Delhi, and Jaipur. This assertion is accompanied by images of a futuristic aircraft, implying that such technology is currently being used to transport commercial passengers.
Fact Check:
The claim of air taxi and routes between Amritsar, Chandigarh, Delhi, and Jaipur has been found to be misleading. Also, so far, neither the Indian government nor the respective aviation authorities have issued any sort of public declarations nor industry insiders to claim any launch of any air taxi service. Further research followed a keyword-based search that directed us to a news report published in The Times of India on January 20, 2025. A similar post to the one seen in the viral video accompanied the report. It stated that Bengaluru-based aerospace startup Sarla Aviation launched its prototype air taxi called “Shunya” during the Bharat Mobility Global Expo. Under this plan, it looks to initiate electric flying taxis in Bangalore by 2028. This urban air transport program for India will be similar to what they are posting in this regard.
Conclusion:
The viral claim saying that there is an air taxi service in India between Amritsar, Chandigarh, Delhi, and Jaipur is entirely false. The pictures and information going viral are misleading and do not relate to any progress or implementation of air taxi technology in India. To date, there is no official confirmation or credible evidence that supports such a service. Information must be verified from reliable sources before it is believed or shared in order to prevent the spread of misinformation.
- Claim: A viral post claims an air taxi is operational between Amritsar, Chandigarh, Delhi, and Jaipur.
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Related Blogs
The recent Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, that came into force in August, has been one of the most widely anticipated regulations in the digital entertainment industry. Among provisions such as promoting esports and licensing of online gaming, the legislation notably introduces a blanket ban on real-money gaming (RMG). The rationale behind this was to reduce its addictive effects, protect minors, and limit the circulation of black-money. However, in reality, the Act has spawned apprehension about the legislative process, regulatory redundancy, and unintended consequences that can shift users and revenue to offshore operators.
From Debate to Prohibition: How the Act was Passed
The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act was passed as a central law, providing the earlier fragmented state laws on online betting and gambling with an overarching framework. Proponents argue that, among other provisions, some kind of unified national framework was needed to deal with the scale of online betting due to its detrimental impact on young users. The current Act is a direct transition to criminalisation rather than the swings of self-regulation and partial restrictions used during the previous decade of incremental experiments in regulation. Stakeholders in the industry believe that this type of sudden, blanket action creates uncertainty and erodes confidence in the system in the long run. Further, critics have pointed out that the Bill was passed without adequate Parliamentary deliberation. A question has been raised about whether procedural safeguards were upheld.
Prohibition of Online RMG
Within the Indian context, a distinction has long been drawn between games of skill and games of chance, with the latter, like a lottery or a casino, being severely prohibited under state laws, whereas the former, like rummy or fantasy sports, have generally been allowed after being recognized as skill-based by court authorities. The Online Gaming Act of 2025 abolishes this distinction on the internet, thus banning all RMG actions that include cash transactions, regardless of skill or chance. The act also criminalises the advertising, facilitation, and hosting of such sites, thereby penalizing offshore operators with an Indian customer focus, and subjecting their payment gateways, app stores, and advertisers under its jurisdiction to penalties.
The Problem of Overlap
One potential issue that the Act presents is its overlap with the existing laws. The IT Rules 2023 mandate intermediaries in the gaming sector to appoint compliance officers, submit monthly reports, and undergo due diligence. The new Act introduces a three-level classification of games, whereas the advisories of the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) under the Consumer Protection Act treat online betting as an unfair trade practice.
This multiplicity of regulations builds a maze where different Ministries and state governments have overlapping jurisdiction. Policy experts caution that such an overlap can create enforcement challenges, punish players who act within the law, and leave offshore malefactors undetected.
Unintended Consequences: Driving Users Offshore
Outright prohibition will hardly ever remove demand; it will only push it out. Offshore sites have taken advantage of the situation as Indian operators like Dream11 shut down their money games after the ban. It has already been reported that there is aggressive advertising by foreign betting companies that are not registered in India, most of which have backend infrastructure that cannot be regulated by the Act (Storyboard18).
This diversion of users to unregulated markets has two main risks. First, Indian players are deprived of the consumer protection offered to them in local regulation, and their data can be sent to suspicious foreign organizations. Second, the government loses control over the money flow that can be transferred via informal channels or cryptocurrencies or other obscure systems. Industry analysts are alerting that such developments may only worsen the issue of black-money instead of solving it (IGamingBusiness).
Advertising, Age Gating, and Digital Rights
The Act has also strengthened advertisement regulations, aligning with advisories issued by the Advertising Standards Council of India, which prohibits the targeting of minors. However, critics believe that the application remains inadequately enforced, and children can with comparative ease access unregulated overseas applications. In the absence of complementary digital literacy programs and strong parental controls, these limitations can be effectively superficial instead of real.
Privacy advocates also warn that frequent prompts, vague messages, or invasive surveillance can weaken the digital rights of users instead of strengthening them. Overregulation has also been found to create banner blindness in global contexts where users ignore warnings without first clearly understanding them.
Enforcement Challenges
The Act puts a lot of responsibilities on many stakeholders, including the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). Platforms like Google Play and Apple App Store are expected to verify government-approved lists of compliant gaming apps and remove non-compliant or banned ones, as directed by the MIB and the RBI. Although this pressure may motivate intermediaries to collaborate, it may also have a risk of overreach when it is applied unequally or in a political way.
According to the experts, the solution should be underpinned by technology itself. Artificial intelligence can be used to identify illegal advertisements, track illegal gaming in children, and trace payment streams. At the same time, the regulators should be able to issue final lists of either compliant or non-compliant applications to advise the consumers and intermediaries alike. Without such practical provisions, enforcement risks remaining patchy.
Online Gaming Rules
On 1 October 2025, the government issued a draft of the Online Gaming Rules in accordance with the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act. The regulations focus on the creation of the compliance frameworks, define the classification of the allowed gaming activities, and prescribe grievance-redressal mechanisms aiming to promote the protection of the players and procedural transparency. However, the draft does not revisit or soften the existing blanket prohibition on real-money gaming (RMG) and, hence, the questions about the effectiveness of enforcement and regulatory clarity remain open (Times of India, 2025).
Protecting Consumers Without Stifling Innovation
The ban highlights a larger conflict, i.e., the protection of the vulnerable users without stifling an industry that has traditionally contributed to innovation, jobs, and the collection of tax revenue. Online gaming has significantly added to the GST collections, and the sudden shakeup brings fiscal concerns (Reuters).
Several legal objections to the Act have already been brought, asking whether the Act is constitutional, especially as to whether the restrictions are proportional to the right to trade. The outcome of such cases will define the future trajectory of the digital economy of India (Reuters).
Way Forward
Instead of outright prohibition, a more balanced approach that incorporates regulation and consumer protection is suggested by the experts. Key measures could include:
- A definite difference between games of skill and games of chance, with proportionate regulation.
- Age confirmation and campaign against online illiteracy to protect the underage population.
- Enhanced advertising and payments compliance requirements and enforceable non-compliance penalty.
- Coordinated oversight among different ministries to prevent duplication and regulatory struggle.
- Leveraging AI and fintech to track illegal financial activities (black money flows) and developing innovation.
Conclusion
The Online Gaming Act 2025 addresses social issues, such as addiction, monetary risk, and child safety, that require governance interventions. However, the path it follows to this end, that of total prohibition, is more likely to spawn a new set of issues instead of providing solutions because it will send consumers to offshore sites, undermine consumer rights, and slow innovation.
For India, the real challenge is not whether to prohibit online money gaming but how to create a balanced, transparent, and enforceable framework that protects users while fostering a responsible gaming ecosystem. India can reduce the adverse consequences of online betting without keeping the industry in the shadows with better coordination, reasonable use of technology, and balanced protection.
References:
- India's Dream11, top gaming apps halt money-based games after ban
- India online gambling ban could drive punters to black market
- Offshore betting firms with backend ops in India not covered by online gaming law
- The Great Gamble: India’s Online Gaming Ban, The GST Battle, And What Lies Ahead.
- Game Over for Online Money Games? An Analysis of the Online Gaming Act 2025
- Government gambles heavily on prohibiting online money gaming
- Online gaming regulation: New rules to take effect from October 1; government stresses consultative approach with industry
Executive Summary
A dispute had recently emerged in Kotdwar, Uttarakhand, over the name of a shop. During the controversy, a local youth, Deepak Kumar, came forward in support of the shopkeeper. The incident subsequently became a subject of discussion on social media, with users expressing varied reactions. Meanwhile, a photo began circulating on social media showing a burqa-clad woman presenting a bouquet to Deepak Kumar. The image is being shared with the claim that All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM)’s women’s president, Rubina, welcomed “Mohammad Deepak Kumar” by presenting him with a bouquet. However, research conducted by the CyberPeace found the viral claim to be false. The research revealed that users are sharing an AI-generated image with a misleading claim.
Claim:
On social media platform Instagram, a user shared the viral image claiming that AIMIM’s women’s president Rubina welcomed “Mohammad Deepak Kumar” by presenting him with a bouquet. The link to the post, its archived version, and a screenshot are provided below.
Fact Check:
Upon closely examining the viral image, certain inconsistencies raised suspicion that it could be AI-generated. To verify its authenticity, the image was analysed using the AI detection tool Hive Moderation, which indicated a 96 percent probability that the image was AI-generated.
In the next stage of the research , the image was also analysed using another AI detection tool, Wasit AI, which likewise identified the image as AI-generated.
Conclusion
The research establishes that users are circulating an AI-generated image with a misleading claim linking it to the Kotdwar controversy.
.webp)
Introduction
The link between social media and misinformation is undeniable. Misinformation, particularly the kind that evokes emotion, spreads like wildfire on social media and has serious consequences, like undermining democratic processes, discrediting science, and promulgating hateful discourses which may incite physical violence. If left unchecked, misinformation propagated through social media has the potential to incite social disorder, as seen in countless ethnic clashes worldwide. This is why social media platforms have been under growing pressure to combat misinformation and have been developing models such as fact-checking services and community notes to check its spread. This article explores the pros and cons of the models and evaluates their broader implications for online information integrity.
How the Models Work
- Third-Party Fact-Checking Model (formerly used by Meta) Meta initiated this program in 2016 after claims of extraterritorial election tampering through dis/misinformation on its platforms. It entered partnerships with third-party organizations like AFP and specialist sites like Lead Stories and PolitiFact, which are certified by the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) for meeting neutrality, independence, and editorial quality standards. These fact-checkers identify misleading claims that go viral on platforms and publish verified articles on their websites, providing correct information. They also submit this to Meta through an interface, which may link the fact-checked article to the social media post that contains factually incorrect claims. The post then gets flagged for false or misleading content, and a link to the article appears under the post for users to refer to. This content will be demoted in the platform algorithm, though not removed entirely unless it violates Community Standards. However, in January 2025, Meta announced it was scrapping this program and beginning to test X’s Community Notes Model in the USA, before rolling it out in the rest of the world. It alleges that the independent fact-checking model is riddled with personal biases, lacks transparency in decision-making, and has evolved into a censoring tool.
- Community Notes Model ( Used by X and being tested by Meta): This model relies on crowdsourced contributors who can sign up for the program, write contextual notes on posts and rate the notes made by other users on X. The platform uses a bridging algorithm to display those notes publicly, which receive cross-ideological consensus from voters across the political spectrum. It does this by boosting those notes that receive support despite the political leaning of the voters, which it measures through their engagements with previous notes. The benefit of this system is that it is less likely for biases to creep into the flagging mechanism. Further, the process is relatively more transparent than an independent fact-checking mechanism since all Community Notes contributions are publicly available for inspection, and the ranking algorithm can be accessed by anyone, allowing for external evaluation of the system by anyone.
CyberPeace Insights
Meta’s uptake of a crowdsourced model signals social media’s shift toward decentralized content moderation, giving users more influence in what gets flagged and why. However, the model’s reliance on diverse agreements can be a time-consuming process. A study (by Wirtschafter & Majumder, 2023) shows that only about 12.5 per cent of all submitted notes are seen by the public, making most misleading content go unchecked. Further, many notes on divisive issues like politics and elections may not see the light of day since reaching a consensus on such topics is hard. This means that many misleading posts may not be publicly flagged at all, thereby hindering risk mitigation efforts. This casts aspersions on the model’s ability to check the virality of posts which can have adverse societal impacts, especially on vulnerable communities. On the other hand, the fact-checking model suffers from a lack of transparency, which has damaged user trust and led to allegations of bias.
Since both models have their advantages and disadvantages, the future of misinformation control will require a hybrid approach. Data accuracy and polarization through social media are issues bigger than an exclusive tool or model can effectively handle. Thus, platforms can combine expert validation with crowdsourced input to allow for accuracy, transparency, and scalability.
Conclusion
Meta’s shift to a crowdsourced model of fact-checking is likely to have bigger implications on public discourse since social media platforms hold immense power in terms of how their policies affect politics, the economy, and societal relations at large. This change comes against the background of sweeping cost-cutting in the tech industry, political changes in the USA and abroad, and increasing attempts to make Big Tech platforms more accountable in jurisdictions like the EU and Australia, which are known for their welfare-oriented policies. These co-occurring contestations are likely to inform the direction the development of misinformation-countering tactics will take. Until then, the crowdsourcing model is still in development, and its efficacy is yet to be seen, especially regarding polarizing topics.
References
- https://www.cyberpeace.org/resources/blogs/new-youtube-notes-feature-to-help-users-add-context-to-videos
- https://en-gb.facebook.com/business/help/315131736305613?id=673052479947730
- http://techxplore.com/news/2025-01-meta-fact.html
- https://about.fb.com/news/2025/01/meta-more-speech-fewer-mistakes/
- https://communitynotes.x.com/guide/en/about/introduction
- https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2025/01/14/do-community-notes-work/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
- https://www.techpolicy.press/community-notes-and-its-narrow-understanding-of-disinformation/
- https://www.rstreet.org/commentary/metas-shift-to-community-notes-model-proves-that-we-can-fix-big-problems-without-big-government/
- https://tsjournal.org/index.php/jots/article/view/139/57
