#FactCheck-False Claim Says 20,000 Sikh and Muslim Soldiers Resigned from Indian Army

Introduction

In the digital entertainment world, OTT platforms have become highly popular and have attracted larger audiences. They offer a wide variety of entertaining content. However, there are certain concerns about depicting illicit or objectionable content on such platforms. The Indian Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (I&B) has been working on tackling issues like the availability of obscene content on online streaming platforms and other platforms. I&B Ministry has taken important steps to prevent the spread of such illicit or objectionable content.

The I&B Ministry has taken action against obscene and vulgar content on OTT platforms. A total 18 OTT platforms and several associated websites, apps, and social media handles have been blocked nationwide. The government has been in consistent talks with these platforms and issued several advisories, but they have not been adhered to. The decision was made after consultation with other ministries, domain experts, and industry bodies. The content allegedly obscene was found to depict nudity, sexual intercourse, and inappropriate sexual acts within societal contexts. The government states that it is the responsibility of platforms to ensure that content is not present in a vulgar fashion. Creativities do not necessarily mean promoting or propagating vulgar and sexual content.

Key Highlights of I&B Ministry Action against Obscene Content

On 14th March 2024, The Indian Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (I&B) announced the blocking of 18 OTT platforms, 19 Websites, 10 apps, and 57 social media handles for displaying obscene and vulgar content. Union Minister for Information & Broadcasting Shri Anurag Singh Thakur has announced the removal of 18 OTT platforms that published obscene and vulgar content, underscoring the responsibility of platforms to prevent the spread of such content. The decision was made under the Information Technology Act 2000 and in consultation with other Indian ministries and domain experts in media, entertainment, women's rights, and child rights.

List of Blocked OTT Platforms

OTT platforms that have been blocked are Dreams Films, Voovi, Yessma, Uncut Adda, Tri Flicks, X Prime, Neon X VIP, Besharams, Hunters, Rabbit, Xtramood, Nuefliks, MoodX, Mojflix, Hot Shots VIP, Fugi, Chikooflix, Prime Play.

It was highlighted that these OTT platforms, despite not being widely popular, have a significant viewership. One app has over 1 crore downloads, while two others have more than 50 lakh downloads on Google Play Store. These platforms also market their content through social media, with a combined followership of over 32 lakh.

Nature of content

The ministry reported that a significant portion of the content on social media platforms was obscene, vulgar, and demeaning, depicting nudity and sexual acts in inappropriate contexts like teacher-student relationships and incestuous family relationships. The content included sexual innuendos and prolonged pornographic scenes without any thematic or societal relevance. It was further stated that the content was found to be prima facie in violation of Section 67 and 67A of the Information & Technology Act, 2000, Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code and  Section 4 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986.

Way Forward

The press release by the ministry stated that “The Government of India remains committed to fostering the growth and development of the OTT industry. Several measures have been undertaken in this regard, including the introduction of the Inaugural OTT Award for Web Series at the 54th International Film Festival of India, collaboration with OTT platforms in the media and entertainment sector, and the establishment of a light touch regulatory framework with an emphasis on self-regulation under the IT Rules, 2021.”

This shows that the Indian government is dedicated to promoting the growth of the OTT industry but within certain checks or oversight mechanisms to prevent illicit or objectionable content on such platforms.

OTT Content and Regulatory Checks

Online content streaming on OTT platforms lacks regulatory checks, unlike films, which are reviewed and certified by a government-appointed board. The government has instructed streaming services to independently review content for obscenity and violence before it is made available online. There have been repeated instances where criticism has been raised about the illicit or violative depicted content in some OTT shows. This highlights the issue of checks and balances. The government has urged self-regulation on platforms, but the repeated instances of illicit content raise societal concerns. The Ministry of I&B is keen towards promoting ethical & moral standards of content that is being hosted on online OTT platforms.

Conclusion

The Ministry of I&B has taken a step and announced the shutdown of 18 OTT platforms that were engaged in depicting illicit content. This shows that the I&B Ministry is committed to promoting ethical online content. While legislative measures are required to prevent the spread of such illicit or violative content, joint efforts by the government, industry players, and civil society are critical to ensuring a secure and responsible digital environment for all users.

References

• https://pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2014477
• https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/centre-bans-ott-platforms-websites-and-apps-over-obscene-and-vulgar-content/article67949819.ece
• https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/ib-ministry-blocks-18-ott-platforms-for-vulgar-content/articleshow/108485880.cms?from=mdr
• https://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/information-and-broadcasting-ministry-blocks-18-ott-platforms-for-obscene-and-vulgar-content-9213749/
• https://www.storyboard18.com/ott-news/mib-blocks-18-ott-platforms-for-showing-obscene-and-vulgar-content-26400.htm

‍

Introduction

The Indian Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has proposed a new legislation. On the 10th of November, 2023, a draft bill emerged, a parchment of governance seeking to sculpt the contours of the nation's broadcasting landscape. The Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2023, is not merely a legislative doctrine; it is a harbinger of change, an attestation to the storm of technology and the diversification of media in the age of the internet.     

The bill, slated to replace the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act of 1995, acknowledges the paradigm shifts that have occurred in the media ecosystem. The emergence of Internet Protocol Television (IPTV), over-the-top (OTT) platforms and other digital broadcasting services has rendered the previous legislation a relic, ill-suited to the dynamism of the current milieu. The draft bill, therefore, stands at the precipice of the future, inviting stakeholders and the vox populi to weigh in on its provisions, to shape the edifice of regulation that will govern the airwaves and the digital streams.

Defining the certain Clauses of the bill

Clause 1 (dd) - The Programme 

In the intricate tapestry of the bill's clauses, certain threads stand out, demanding scrutiny and careful consideration. Clause 1(dd), for instance, grapples with the definition of 'Programme,' a term that, in its current breadth, could ensnare the vast expanse of audio, visual, and written content transmitted through broadcasting networks. The implications are profound: content disseminated via YouTube or any website could fall within the ambit of this regulation, a prospect that raises questions about the scope of governmental oversight in the digital realm.

Clause 2(v) - The news and current affairs 

Clause 2(v) delves into the murky waters of 'news and current affairs programmes,' a definition that, as it stands, is a maelstrom of ambiguity. The phrases 'newly-received or noteworthy audio, visual or audio-visual programmes' and 'about recent events primarily of socio-political, economic or cultural nature' are a siren's call, luring the unwary into a vortex of subjective interpretation. The threat of potential abuse looms larger, threatening the right to freedom of expression enshrined in Article 19 of the Indian Constitution. It is a clarion call for stakeholders to forge a definition that is objective and clear, one that is in accordance with the Supreme Court's decision in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, which upheld the sanctity of digital expression while advocating for responsible content creation.

Clause 2(y) Over the Top Broadcasting Services 

Clause 2(y) casts its gaze upon OTT broadcasting services, entities that operate in a realm distinct from traditional broadcasting. The one-to-many paradigm of broadcast media justifies a degree of governmental control, but OTT streaming is a more intimate affair, a one-on-one engagement with content on personal devices. The draft bill's attempt to umbrella OTT services under the broadcasting moniker is a conflation that could stifle the diversity and personalised nature of these platforms. It is a conundrum that other nations, such as Australia and Singapore, have approached with nuanced regulatory frameworks that recognise the unique characteristics of OTT services.

Clause 4(4) - Requirements for Broadcasters and Network Operators 

The bill's journey through the labyrinth of regulation is fraught with other challenges. The definition of 'Person' in Clause 2(z), the registration exemptions in Clause 4(4), the prohibition on state governments and political parties from engaging in broadcasting in Clause 6, and the powers of inspection and seizure in Clauses 30(2) and 31, all present a complex puzzle. Each clause, each sub-section, is a cog in the machinery of governance that must be calibrated with precision to balance the imperatives of regulation with the freedoms of expression and innovation.

Clause 27 - Advisory Council

The Broadcast Advisory Council, envisioned in Clause 27, is yet another crucible where the principles of impartiality and independence must be tempered. The composition of this council, the public consultations that inform its establishment, and the alignment with constitutional principles are all vital to its legitimacy and efficacy.

A Way Forward 

It is up to us, as participants in the democratic process and citizens, to interact with the bill's provisions as it makes its way through the halls of public discourse and legislative examination. To guarantee that the ultimate version of the Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2023, is a symbol of advancement and a charter that upholds our most valued liberties while welcoming the opportunities presented by the digital era, we must employ the instruments of study and discussion.

The draft bill is more than just a document in this turbulent time of transition; it is a story of India's dreams, a testament to its dedication to democracy, and a roadmap for its digital future. Therefore, let us take this duty with the seriousness it merits, as the choices we make today will have a lasting impact on the history of our country and the media environment for future generations.

References 

• https://scroll.in/article/1059881/why-indias-new-draft-broadcast-bill-has-raised-fears-of-censorship-and-press-suppression#:~:text=The%20bill%20extends%20the%20regulatory,regulation%20through%20content%20evaluation%20committees.
• https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1976200
• https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/new-broadcast-bill-may-also-cover-those-who-put-up-news-content-online-101701023054502.html

Introduction

Imagine spending two years , 730 days of early mornings, missed social events, and relentless mock tests  preparing for a single examination. Now imagine that on the morning of that exam, your phone buzzes with a forwarded video claiming the question paper has already leaked. Your heart sinks. You do not know whether to trust it or ignore it. You have about forty minutes before you must enter the hall. This was the reality for a section of the 22 lakh students who sat for the NEET UG 2026 re-examination on June 21, 2026, when a fabricated video alleging a paper leak on Telegram began circulating across WhatsApp groups and X within hours of the exam commencing. The National Testing Agency (NTA) swiftly and categorically denied the claims, activated the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), and appealed to the public not to amplify unverified content. The examination concluded without incident. But the episode laid bare a challenge that no security perimeter or surveillance camera can fully address: the weaponisation of misinformation against India's high-stakes examination ecosystem.

‍

The Anatomy of Examination Misinformation

‍

Why Examinations Are a Prime Target

India's national examinations are uniquely fertile ground for misinformation. With over 22 lakh candidates registered for NEET UG 2026 alone, the audience is vast, anxious, and hungry for any update  verified or otherwise. Research by MIT has found that false stories spread six times faster than accurate ones on social media, and are seventy percent more likely to be reshared. In India, where over 535 million people use WhatsApp and studies show that most users tend to trust messages forwarded by family and friends, the conditions for viral misinformation are near-ideal. According to a 2020 Microsoft survey, 52 percent of Indian respondents encountered misinformation at least once a day, the highest rate globally.

What makes examination-related misinformation especially dangerous is its timing. Fabricated content is almost always released on examination day itself, the precise moment when candidates are most emotionally vulnerable, official channels are stretched thin, and the window for effective rebuttal is narrowest. The NEET UG 2026 fake video, circulated on Telegram and amplified across closed WhatsApp groups, fits this pattern precisely. It was engineered not to inform, but to destabilise.

‍

A History That Sharpens the Anxiety

This misinformation did not emerge in a vacuum. The shadow of the 2024 NEET UG controversy  in which the Supreme Court of India confirmed that at least 155 students had directly benefited from a genuine paper leak, and which triggered nationwide protests, CBI investigations, and a parliamentary uproar — still looms large. Students and parents conditioned by that experience are primed to believe the worst, even when claims are entirely false. In 2026, that residual anxiety became the very vulnerability that bad actors sought to exploit. The government's response which included temporarily restricting access to Telegram in the lead-up to the re-examination  underscored just how seriously the threat of examination misinformation is now being taken at the highest levels.

‍

The NTA's Response: Why It Matters

‍

1. Speed and Transparency as Governance Tools: In crisis communication, the first credible voice usually wins. The NTA's near-immediate public denial posted on official social media handles and amplified by the Press Information Bureau's PIB Fact Check unit was a meaningful departure from the delayed, defensive responses that characterised earlier examination controversies. By directly labelling the video "FAKE" in capital letters, describing its creation as "a serious offence," and simultaneously appealing to students to rely only on official sources at neet.nta.nic.in, the NTA left little room for the false narrative to consolidate. NTA Director General Abhishek Singh went further, publicly stating that the agency was "100 per cent confident" in the integrity of the process and that no complaints of a genuine paper leak had been received. This matters beyond crisis management. Public trust in examination systems is not rebuilt through official statements alone , it is rebuilt through the consistent, transparent exercise of institutional authority. A swift, fact-based rebuttal, deployed before rumour hardens into public belief, is as much a governance act as it is a communications strategy.

‍

2. Cybercrime Coordination as a Structural Shift: Perhaps the most significant development in the NTA's response was its coordination with I4C and law enforcement agencies to trace the origin of the fabricated video. This signals a structural evolution: examination misinformation is no longer being treated as an administrative inconvenience but as cybercrime with legal consequences under the Information Technology Act, 2000. The announcement that legal action would follow also carries a deterrent message to potential future actors — that the machinery of cybercrime enforcement will be activated, and that fabricating content to mislead examination candidates is a prosecutable offence.

‍

The Human and Institutional Cost

The costs of examination misinformation are neither abstract nor trivial. Mental health experts have warned that controversies surrounding national-level examinations can have serious long-term psychological consequences for aspirants. Dr. Mustafa Nadeem Kirmani of Amity University has noted that such crises increase the risk of students taking "extreme steps like suicide attempts, anger toward the system, and hopelessness," and can, in the long run, lead to clinical depression. In the wake of the 2026 paper leak controversy, multiple reports of student deaths by suicide were linked to the compounded pressures of exam cancellation and uncertainty a grim reminder of the real human stakes behind governance failures in this domain. For institutions, every viral misinformation episode generates an avoidable administrative crisis. Helplines are overwhelmed, examination centre staff face panicked queries, and senior officials are pulled into damage control rather than exam administration. The credibility of clarifications issued under pressure is itself questioned by a public already primed for suspicion. This administrative burden, multiplied across 5,440 examination centres in India and 14 abroad, represents a significant and entirely unnecessary cost.

‍

Building a Resilient Ecosystem: What Needs to Change

‍

1. Proactive Communication and Platform Coordination: Institutional credibility is built before a crisis, not during one. Examination bodies must invest in sustained pre-examination communication that educates candidates and parents about the existence of misinformation campaigns and tells them exactly where to look for verified updates. This means highly visible, verified social media presences with large followings, real-time update protocols, and formal escalation channels with platforms like WhatsApp, Telegram, X, and YouTube to enable rapid takedown of false examination-related content. The IT Amendment Rules of 2023, which require significant social media intermediaries to act on government-flagged content, provide a legal basis for such coordination  but the operational infrastructure to activate it at speed must be built in advance, not improvised on the day.

‍

2. Fact-Checking Partnerships and Digital Literacy: Independent organisations such as BOOM Live, Alt News, and Vishvas News have proven their capacity to rapidly debunk examination misinformation. Formalising their role through a structured public-private partnership  where examination authorities share real-time verified information with empanelled fact-checkers  could close the window during which false content circulates unchallenged. Equally critical is investment in digital media literacy among students and parents. A 2018 survey found that nearly 45 percent of Indian respondents were unaware of any fact-checking organisations. Addressing this gap through school curricula, coaching networks, and the Ministry of Education's DIKSHA platform  is a preventive investment far less costly than repeated crisis management.

‍

Conclusion

‍

The NTA's handling of the NEET UG 2026 fake video was, by recent standards, exemplary. It was fast, transparent, authoritative, and backed by the activation of cybercrime enforcement. But a single well-managed episode does not constitute a resilient system. India runs some of the world's largest entrance examinations, and the stakes medical seats, livelihoods, and the aspirations of crores of young people are too high for crisis response alone to suffice. Combating examination misinformation requires permanent structural investment: dedicated rapid-response cells within examination bodies, formalised fact-checking pipelines, proactive platform coordination, and a sustained public education effort around digital verification. Protecting the integrity of India's examination ecosystem is not merely an administrative responsibility. It is a commitment to the millions of students who give everything they have to compete fairly and who deserve a system that protects them not only from cheating, but from the fear of it.

‍

References

‍

1. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/131900261.cms
2. https://www.india.com/education/neet-ug-2026-re-exam-paper-leak-claim-goes-viral-nta-says-video-is-fake-and-false-fabricated-examination-conducted-successfully-8453620/
3. https://www.republicworld.com/education/neet-ug-re-exam-nta-says-paper-leak-video-fake-test-conducted-successfully-2026-06-22-129346
4. https://thefederal.com/category/education/neet-re-exam-paper-leak-admission-system-crisis-247410
5. https://www.outlookindia.com/healthcare-spotlight/beyond-the-paper-leak-emotional-trauma-among-neet-aspirants-raises-concern
6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_NEET_controversy
7. https://kaval.chat/blog/misinformation-scam-statistics-india-2026/
8. https://www.ijert.org/the-virality-gap-political-misinformation-and-the-information-crisis-in-india-s-digital-democracy-ijertv15is050041
9. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aap9559 https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/digital-skills/digital-civility
10. https://www.meity.gov.in/content/information-technology-intermediary-guidelines-and-digital-media-ethics-code-amendment
11. https://www.indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/1999 
12. https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx 
13. https://www.careerindia.com/news/addressing-the-mental-health-crisis-sparked-by-net-and-neet-paper-leaked-in-india-041963.html
14. https://thediplomat.com/2025/03/indias-growing-misinformation-crisis-a-threat-to-democracy/

‍