How ‘hot takes’ by several Indian YouTubers are legitimizing conspiracy theories

YouTube channel ‘AKTK’, which stands for ‘Aaj Ki Taza Khabar’ (today’s latest news), boasts of over 1.42 million subscribers on the platform. The channel has posted about 1,400 videos, and since its inception in 2007 has received nearly 263 million views, as per its own admission. 

On July 22, AKTK posted a video titled “Yogi’s Revolutionary step to Display Names is ahead of its Time.” The nearly 30-minute video defended Uttar Pradesh authorities' now-paused directive asking eatery owners to display their full name along the Kanwar Yatra route, a Hindu religious procession. 

Screenshot of AKTK’s homepage on YouTube (Source:YouTube)

The video focused on the much debated move on the premise that a “particular community” is known to spit in food and the directive offers caution. Without explicitly using the term “thook jihad” (spit jihad)  the video attempts to legitimize the oft-repeated conspiracy theory that targets India’s largest minority by using video montages of Muslims allegedly indulging in it. Dividing the video chapter by chapter among two hosts, one says what to eat based on religious reasons is every person’s right.

Video on U.P. authorities asking for names to be displayed on Kanwar Yatra route (Source:AKTK/YouTube)

Other videos on this channel are in a similar vein. They combine commentary and opinion with conspiracy theories to peddle misinformation that indirectly targets the minorities and the political Opposition in India. “Rahul Gandhi's mission 2029 Revealed,” “Is Bengal turning into Taliban?," and "Haryanvi kicking Khalistanis,” are some of the recent videos posted on the channel that have garnered hundreds of thousands of views. All these videos target Opposition parties, spread falsehoods about minority groups, and spew hateful narratives.

Screenshots of the videos on AKTK’s YouTube channel. (Source: YouTube/Screenshot)

AKTK is one of the several pages on YouTube that are gaining immense popularity by spreading harmful content rooted in conspiracy theories and falsehoods. While the platform has strict policies against hate speech, a rise in number of such influencers indicate their violations may be going unchecked.

When opinions venture into misinformation

AKTK’s video on U.P. authorities directive based on the argument that choosing what to eat based on religious reasons is seen with the larger online campaign to boycott Muslim-owned businesses in recent years. In its recent video on West Bengal, the host cited a 2016 report claiming a village in the state was not permitted to celebrate Durga Puja because of opposition from its Muslim population. However, a ground report by Scroll found authorities gave conflicting responses on why permission was denied, although there was some opposition. 

The report also said television news strengthened the anti-Hindu narrative by “omitting any mention of the ban on the Bakr Eid sacrifice by the local administration. Had it been brought to light, the narrative of minority appeasement would have hardly stood the test.”

Multiple videos on the channel also routinely refer to the “rising Muslim population” in non-Bharatiya Janata Party ruled states, alluding to the oft-debunked theory that the Muslim population will surpass the Hindu population in the country. 

Amid the Indian national elections, the channel also posted a nearly 30-minute long video discussing how an alleged inheritance tax proposed by the Congress Party would disproportionately impact Hindus— a false claim based on the political rhetoric that gained credence amid political campaigning. The page combines mixing popular narratives with fear mongering citing multiple resources and indulging in whataboutery.

“YouTube not only has users from diverse communities, they are also from diverse socio-economic backgrounds, they are from different religious cultural identities. So in that regard, the impact such content has in influencing or affecting different communities may be huge,” according to Shruti Shreya, a researcher and senior programme manager for platform regulation at The Dialogue. She added, “It becomes very important to differentiate genuine commentary and opinion which is just a manifestation of their free speech, from somebody who is trying to do it with any illicit or malafide intentions. And it is not easy, the lines are very blurred.”

Logically Facts found several other channels on YouTube combining political and cultural commentary with anti-Opposition narratives rooted in misinformation and Islamophobia. For instance: The Sham Sharma Show has over 1.56 million subscribers on YouTube.

In a video titled “The HUGE CRISIS In Punjab That No One Is Talking About,” the host talks about a series of threats to the state including mass conversions to Christianity, a narrative commonly used to vilify certain groups in the state. He claims Punjab’s Christian population increased from 1.5 percent to over 15 percent. However, Logically Facts has previously reported  that on comparing the 2011 [last available census data] and 2001 census, India’s Christian population grew at 15.7 percent, the slowest pace compared to other communities, and Punjab’s Christian population increased by approximately 50,000, constituting nearly 1.5 percent of the state’s demographics. 

In another video titled “Dear India, THIS Is What REAL Dictatorship Looks Like” that got over 508,000 views, the host addresses “dictatorships” in states under the leadership of the Opposition, calling Modi a “weaker dictator” in comparison; and stating they may be responsible for “completely destroying and dividing India.” The video cites incidents without context. For instance, referencing the 2013 Muzaffarnagar riots in Uttar Pradesh under Samajwadi Party leader Akhilesh Yadav, the host says they “tried to teach Hindus a lesson” without mentioning that a majority among the 62 who died were Muslim.

Screenshot of The Sham Sharma Show’s YouTube page. (Source: YouTube)

“I think we would be naive to say that such channels don't have an impact on how people are consuming a lot of data for a big part of the general population now. The traditional media channels are not the sources of information, it is one of their networks where they get it,” according to Mishi Choudhary, founder of the Software Freedom Law Center.

Other channels called ‘The Jaipur Dialogues’, ‘Dil Se Dil Tak’ (heart to heart), and ‘Ishkaran Singh Bhandari’ who have 1.53 million, 231,000, and 666,000 subscribers respectively, post content that promotes conspiracy theories, narratives based on falsehoods and unverified speculation.

For instance: The Jaipur Dialogues recently posted a video targeting journalist Rajdeep Sardesai questioning his religious identity, and has previously alleged Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi may be supporting Sikh separatism – without any evidence. 

Dil Se Dil Tak posted a video blaming the Kerala state government for teaching public school students that Muslims are hygienic and Hindus are dirty in their textbooks. However, fact-checking outlets found that the text was from a private school book that had previously come under scrutiny. 

YouTuber and lawyer Ishkaran Singh Bhandari has espoused conspiracy theories of a “globalist” agenda accusing George Soros for funding the media to oust Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi for being pro-India. “Soros has created a one billion dollar fund, because he cannot tolerate Hindu rashtrawadi (nationalism),” the lawyer says in the video. However, there is no basis for this amount or claim. Soros has been at the heart of multiple right-wing conspiracy theories over the decades ranging from his plans to set a New World Order, to him being behind former U.S. President Donald Trump’s indictment. In recent years, Soros has started being linked to narratives within India sans evidence.

“We tend to be attracted more towards things which are made with the intention of creating sensation. It’s why some of these influencers try to sensationalize stuff—to get that kind of viewership. Influencers understand this human psychology and then develop content accordingly. And if they are exploiting this tendency, then something needs to be done to keep it in check,” Shreya said.

But do half-truths violate policy?

With over 460 million Indian users, the reach of such right-wing channels using vernacular languages nationwide is massive. Difficulty in moderating content in local dialects, coupled with the time taken to scrutinize videos compared to text, makes it more difficult to gauge the impact of such inflammatory content. 

A report by New York University’s Center for Business and Human Rights stated that content that provokes negative emotion is the one that receives higher engagement, and in turn more money. The report claimed YouTube’s programme for sharing advertiser revenue with popular creators means “purveyors of misinformation can make a living while amplifying the grievances and resentments that foment partisan hatred, particularly on the political right.” 

Commenting on how the platform monetize such content, Chaudhary said, “We don't also have an idea of how much they are profiting from channels like these. Perhaps it does not get the same amount of scrutiny because of its very good public relations, government relations. We don’t talk about it as much.” In 2022, fact-checkers from across the world wrote an open letter  to YouTube offering solutions to reduce misinformation on the problem, but there has been no “meaningful change”.

Although YouTube’s hate speech policy states that action will be taken against videos that incite hatred against individuals or groups, it does mention that it’s allowed in cases where hate speech is used for “educational, documentary, scientific, or artistic content.” The platform’s misinformation policy also specifies that if the said content is for the listed reasons then no action will be taken. “We also allow personal expressions of opinion on the above topics as long as they don’t otherwise violate any of the policies outlined above,” the policy reads.

Highlighting how this kind of content has become far more influential, Choudhary said, “The independent content creators who are able to take and distill a lot of resources and produce some slick 30 or 15-minute thing giving them the entire jist of what's going on, and some commentary built in has carried far more weight with people.”  

Although over the past few years researchers credit YouTube for working on its algorithm recommendation which now suggests less extreme or radical content, there is an opaqueness in understanding how it enacts its policies considering several key factors: Maintaining its relationship with government, stakeholders, and profits earned through ad revenues.

Referring to the use of the IT Rules of 2009 and 2021 by the Central Government to demand removal or modification of content on social media platforms, Choudhary said, “The government in the last two terms have used the rules as a default tool to shape the narrative the way they would like. They have used that as a way to bring all the platforms into a relationship wherever the government tells them that if they don't remove it, then they tend to lose.”

Shreya says a more robust human review could help curb the mammoth of videos uploaded daily. “There is a very thin line between somebody sharing their opinion, and somebody speaking in a way so as to mobilize crowds. It is important that the entire enforcement of community guidelines is more wholesome. With not only some AI tools flagging content, but there has to be robust human review. And also dialogues and assessments to determine whether such content was actually leading to something harmful and hazardous for the society or it was just somebody expressing their opinion.”

(Editor’s Note: We have refrained from adding any links to the video to avoid giving them more traction. Logically Facts has also written to YouTube and all the channels referred to in the piece. This story will be updated if and when we receive a response.)