#FactCheck-Stone Pelting Video from Mathura Misrepresented as Part of “Cockroach Janata Party” Campaign; Fact Check Reveals Old Incident
Executive Summary
A video showing stone pelting on vehicles is being widely shared on social media and falsely linked to a campaign called the “Cockroach Janata Party.” The claim suggests that people have taken to the streets and are attacking VIP vehicles by throwing stones. CyberPeace Research Wing research found that the video is from March and shows stone pelting on a police vehicle in Mathura following the killing of “Farasa Wale Baba.”
Claim
An 18-second viral clip circulating online shows a crowd throwing stones at passing vehicles. The video also contains overlaid text reading,“Cockroach sarkon par utar chuke hain, ab koi VIP nahi, ab sab barabar hain.”Users are sharing it as part of a supposed “Cockroach Janata Party” campaign.
Fact Check
A reverse image search of key frames shows that the clip was originally uploaded on multiple social media accounts on March 22–23, where it was described as an incident from Mathura following the death of a local figure known as “Farasa Wale Baba.” In those posts, the incident was reported as stone pelting on a police vehicle by miscreants.
Further verification found the same visuals in a video posted by NDTV India on March 21, 2026, with a caption stating that it showed stone pelting on police during unrest in Mathura after the death of “Farasa Wale Baba.”
Conclusion
The researchclearly confirms that the viral video has been misrepresented. The footage is from a March incident in Mathura involving unrest following a local death, and it has no connection to any “Cockroach Janata Party” campaign or VIP-targeted violence claims.
Related Blogs
Introduction
In an age where the lines between truth and fiction blur with an alarming regularity, we stand at the precipice of a new and dangerous era. Amidst the wealth of information that characterizes the digital age, deep fakes and disinformation rise like ghosts, haunting our shared reality. These manifestations of a technological revolution that promised enlightenment instead threaten the foundations upon which our societies are built: trust, truth, and collective understanding.
These digital doppelgängers, enabled by advanced artificial intelligence, and their deceitful companion—disinformation—are not mere ghosts in the machine. They are active agents of chaos, capable of undermining the core of democratic values, human rights, and even the safety of individuals who dare to question the status quo.
The Perils of False Narratives in the Digital Age
As a society, we often throw around terms such as 'fake news' with a mixture of disdain and a weary acceptance of their omnipresence. However, we must not understate their gravity. Misinformation and disinformation represent the vanguard of the digital duplicitous tide, a phenomenon growing more complex and dire each day. Misinformation, often spread without malicious intent but with no less damage, can be likened to a digital 'slip of the tongue' — an error in dissemination or interpretation. Disinformation, its darker counterpart, is born of deliberate intent to deceive, a calculated move in the chess game of information warfare.
Their arsenal is varied and ever-evolving: from misleading memes and misattributed quotations to wholesale fabrications in the form of bogus news sites and carefully crafted narratives. Among these weapons of deceit, deepfakes stand out for their audacity and the striking challenge they pose to the concept of seeing to believe. Through the unwelcome alchemy of algorithms, these video and audio forgeries place public figures, celebrities, and even everyday individuals into scenarios they never experienced, uttering words they never said.
The Human Cost: Threats to Rights and Liberties
The impact of this disinformation campaign transcends inconvenience or mere confusion; it strikes at the heart of human rights and civil liberties. It particularly festers at the crossroads of major democratic exercises, such as elections, where the right to a truthful, unmanipulated narrative is not just a political nicety but a fundamental human right, enshrined in Article 25 of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
In moments of political change, whether during elections or pivotal referenda, the deliberate seeding of false narratives is a direct assault on the electorate's ability to make informed decisions. This subversion of truth infects the electoral process, rendering hollow the promise of democratic choice.
This era of computational propaganda has especially chilling implications for those at the frontline of accountability—journalists and human rights defenders. They find themselves targets of character assassinations and smear campaigns that not only put their safety at risk but also threaten to silence the crucial voices of dissent.
It should not be overlooked that the term 'fake news' has, paradoxically, been weaponized by governments and political entities against their detractors. In a perverse twist, this label becomes a tool to shut down legitimate debate and shield human rights violations from scrutiny, allowing for censorship and the suppression of opposition under the guise of combatting disinformation.
Deepening the societal schisms, a significant portion of this digital deceit traffic in hate speech. Its contents are laden with xenophobia, racism, and calls to violence, all given a megaphone through the anonymity and reach the internet so readily provides, feeding a cycle of intolerance and violence vastly disproportionate to that seen in traditional media.
Legislative and Technological Countermeasures: The Ongoing Struggle
The fight against this pervasive threat, as illustrated by recent actions and statements by the Indian government, is multifaceted. Notably, Union Minister Rajeev Chandrasekhar's commitment to safeguarding the Indian populace from the dangers of AI-generated misinformation signals an important step in the legislative and policy framework necessary to combat deepfakes.
Likewise, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's personal experience with a deepfake video accentuates the urgency with which policymakers, technologists, and citizens alike must view this evolving threat. The disconcerting experience of actor Rashmika Mandanna serves as a sobering reminder of the individual harm these false narratives can inflict and reinforces the necessity of a robust response.
In their pursuit to negate these virtual apparitions, policymakers have explored various avenues ranging from legislative action to penalizing offenders and advancing digital watermarks. However, it is not merely in the realm of technology that solutions must be sought. Rather, the confrontation with deepfakes and disinformation is also a battle for the collective soul of societies across the globe.
As technological advancements continue to reshape the battleground, figures like Kris Gopalakrishnan and Manish Gangwar posit that only a mix of rigorous regulatory frameworks and savvy technological innovation can hold the front line against this rising tidal wave of digital distrust.
This narrative is not a dystopian vision of a distant future - it is the stark reality of our present. And as we navigate this new terrain, our best defenses are not just technological safeguards, but also the nurturing of an informed and critical citizenry. It is essential to foster media literacy, to temper the human inclination to accept narratives at face value and to embolden the values that encourage transparency and the robust exchange of ideas.
As we peer into the shadowy recesses of our increasingly digital existence, may we hold fast to our dedication to the truth, and in doing so, preserve the essence of our democratic societies. For at stake is not just a technological arms race, but the very quality of our democratic discourse and the universal human rights that give it credibility and strength.
Conclusion
In this age of digital deceit, it is crucial to remember that the battle against deep fakes and disinformation is not just a technological one. It is also a battle for our collective consciousness, a battle to preserve the sanctity of truth in an era of falsehoods. As we navigate the labyrinthine corridors of the digital world, let us arm ourselves with the weapons of awareness, critical thinking, and a steadfast commitment to truth. In the end, it is not just about winning the battle against deep fakes and disinformation, but about preserving the very essence of our democratic societies and the human rights that underpin them.
Introduction
The rapid adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) tools and applications in companies has been largely presented as a groundbreaking development for enterprises. The potential for increased productivity and efficiently scaled companies eliminates repetitive tasks and builds a narrative that practically writes itself for executives. What has largely been ignored, however, is its effect on its users- the employees. Evidence from across the United States, United Kingdom, and continental Europe indicates an increase in psychological disengagement from work, along with an increase in the number of people who are actively sabotaging the very systems that companies have invested millions of dollars to implement, as a direct result of being forced to work with AI.
The Backdrop: Quiet Quitting
Quiet quitting is a form of employee disengagement wherein workers meet only the basic expectations of their job without. Gallup puts global employee engagement at just 21%. State of the Global Workplace 2026 report which analysed employee well-being across 160 countries reports that in India, employee and manager engagement has declined. Around 62% of workers describe themselves as not engaged, and another 17% are actively disengaged — not just drifting, but potentially pulling in the opposite direction. What does this mean for productivity? Gallup estimates this costs the global economy roughly $8.9 trillion in lost productivity each year, around 9% of world GDP. This is the workplace AI has entered into.
How AI Is Changing the Nature of Work
The promise was simpler work but employees report that the reality is often more of it. AI raises output expectations without necessarily reducing effort. Workers now lose the equivalent of 51 working days per year to technology friction, nearly two full months up 42% from 2025. Poorly integrated systems force employees to spend hours troubleshooting or correcting AI-generated outputs, adding cognitive load rather than removing it. Focus efficiency dropped to a three-year low of 60%, as collaboration time surged 34% and multitasking climbed 12%. AI is not eliminating work. It is transforming it into something more demanding and more fragmented. The psychological dimension is equally documented. TalentLMS research found that 54% of employees report persistent workplace unhappiness, with one in five experiencing it frequently or constantly. 29% report unmanageable workloads during this transition, and 15% do not clearly understand their role expectations in an AI-transformed workplace. When workers cannot see where they fit, withdrawal is a rational response.
Then there is the fear. IBM announced it would not replace roughly 7,800 back-office positions that could be handled by AI, framing it as natural attrition. Klarna said its AI assistant was doing the work of 700 full-time customer service agents. Dropbox laid off 16% of its workforce, with its CEO explicitly citing the need to “make room for AI.” AI was the leading cause of job cuts in March 2026 the first time that has happened since tracking began.
The Causal Link: AI Anxiety to Quiet Quitting
A peer-reviewed study published in March 2025 establishes the causal mechanism between forced AI adoption and employee disengagement. Conducted across 457 employees in Turkish SMEs, it found that AI anxiety does not directly compel people to resign. Instead, it triggers quiet quitting a form of progressive disengagement that functions as a precursor to departure. Drawing on Withdrawal Progression Theory, the study frames quiet quitting as a preliminary stage of turnover intention, where withdrawal progresses from mild detachment toward eventual exit. The integrated causal chain runs as follows: forced AI adoption creates work intensification and job anxiety, which produce burnout and loss of autonomy, which trigger psychological withdrawal, which precedes turnover. DHR Global’s Workforce Trends Report for 2026 found that overall employee engagement dropped from 88% to 64% in a single year. Crucially, 69% of C-suite leaders say their company has communicated clearly about AI’s impact on jobs but only 12% of entry-level staff agree. When the people most exposed to displacement are also the least informed about what is happening to their roles, disengagement is not a mystery. It is a response to a vacuum of information.
From Disengagement to Active Withdrawal
Quiet quitting is then a natural response. But what has emerged alongside it is something more active, and it is where the disengagement crisis tips into something organisations are unprepared for. The Writer and Workplace Intelligence survey of 2,400 knowledge workers found that 29% of employees admit to willfully withdrawing from their company’s AI strategy. Among Gen Z workers, that figure jumps to 44%. Active withdrawal takes several forms: entering proprietary data into public AI chatbots, using unapproved tools, outright refusing to engage with mandated platforms, and in some cases deliberately generating low-quality outputs to make the technology look ineffective. For Gen Z, the resistance has a structural logic. Junior roles in finance, law, and tech the traditional “learning by doing” rungs of the career ladder have declined by 32% since 2022. For a 22-year-old, AI is not a tool; it is a competitor that has already taken their first job. Workers who resist AI out of fear for their jobs are making themselves more vulnerable to the outcome they dread. 77% of executives say employees who refuse to become proficient in AI will not be considered for promotions or leadership roles, and 60% are considering cutting those who refuse to adopt it entirely.
Meanwhile, 75% of executives admit their company’s AI strategy is “more for show” than a meaningful guide to outcomes. Only 29% report significant ROI from generative AI, despite 97% claiming to have already deployed agents across their organisation. 39% of business leaders admit they made employees redundant as a result of deploying AI of whom 55% concede they made the wrong decisions about those redundancies. Organisations are moving fast, getting it wrong, and the cost is being absorbed by the workforce.
Conclusion
AI is not directly causing quiet quitting. However, AI is changing how we view working relationships; it will continue to result in predictable outcomes of poor execution of AI (i.e. passive to active disengagement) and radically change the way that we work, primarily by creating an increase in job demands, reducing autonomy, and raising worker anxiety without providing any transparency about future AI technology use. If AI continues to create a challenging work environment, it may lead to increased psychological detachment from work and ultimately result in productivity losses, possibly canceling out the very gains expected from AI integration. This globally rising disengagement from AI tools begets the question: is technology being deployed responsibly?
References
- https://www.gallup.com/workplace/349484/state-of-the-global-workplace.aspx
- https://www.walkme.com/news-releases/enterprises-lose-51-workdays-per-employee-to-technology-friction-annually-despite-record-ai-investment-walkme-global-study-of-3750-finds/.
- https://www.activtrak.com/resources/state-of-the-workplace/
- https://peoplemanagingpeople.com/employee-retention/quiet-cracking/
- https://www.webpronews.com/the-quiet-revolt-gen-z-workers-are-deliberately-undermining-ai-deployments-from-the-inside/
- https://www.uctoday.com/productivity-automation/44-of-gen-z-workers-are-sabotaging-your-enterprise-ai-rollout-the-problem-isnt-gen-z/
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11939379/
- https://huntscanlon.com/workforce-trends-2026-leaders-confront-burnout-disengagement-and-ai-driven-change/
- https://fortune.com/2026/04/08/gen-z-workers-sabotage-ai-rollout-backlash/
- https://peoplemanagingpeople.com/employee-retention/quiet-cracking/
- https://www.hrgrapevine.com/us/content/article/2026-04-09-ai-adoption-is-tearing-companies-apart-says-new-report
- https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/new-updates/india-leads-in-workplace-disengagement-as-quiet-quitting-trend-rises-why-are-indians-mentally-checking-out-at-jobs/articleshow/130104773.cms?from=mdr
Executive Summary:
A photo allegedly shows an Israeli Army dog attacking an elderly Palestinian woman has been circulating online on social media. However, the image is misleading as it was created using Artificial Intelligence (AI), as indicated by its graphical elements, watermark ("IN.VISUALART"), and basic anomalies. Although there are certain reports regarding the real incident in several news channels, the viral image was not taken during the actual event. This emphasizes the need to verify photos and information shared on social media carefully.
Claims:
A photo circulating in the media depicts an Israeli Army dog attacking an elderly Palestinian woman.
Fact Check:
Upon receiving the posts, we closely analyzed the image and found certain discrepancies that are commonly seen in AI-generated images. We can clearly see the watermark “IN.VISUALART” and also the hand of the old lady looks odd.
We then checked in AI-Image detection tools named, True Media and contentatscale AI detector. Both found potential AI Manipulation in the image.
Both tools found it to be AI Manipulated. We then keyword searched for relevant news regarding the viral photo. Though we found relevant news, we didn’t get any credible source for the image.
The photograph that was shared around the internet has no credible source. Hence the viral image is AI-generated and fake.
Conclusion:
The circulating photo of an Israeli Army dog attacking an elderly Palestinian woman is misleading. The incident did occur as per the several news channels, but the photo depicting the incident is AI-generated and not real.
- Claim: A photo being shared online shows an elderly Palestinian woman being attacked by an Israeli Army dog.
- Claimed on: X, Facebook, LinkedIn
- Fact Check: Fake & Misleading
