In India’s Northeast, disinformation fuels ethnic tensions. Building digital literacy is now a peace-building imperative to safeguard fragile stability.
Image Source: Getty Images
Across the world, the growth of digital platforms has transformed the way societies access, share, and interpret information. Social media has become a primary conduit for news and opinion worldwide, shaping public discourse with unprecedented speed and reach. While this connectivity has democratised information access, it has also intensified the risks posed by misinformation and disinformation, particularly in regions where socio-political contexts are fragile. Over the recent years, the phenomenon of online disinformation has had deeply damaging consequences in India’s Northeast—a region that has witnessed significant ethnic tensions. When deliberately misleading content begins to shape public opinion and political ideologies, social cohesion and peace tend to be undermined.
Disinformation in the Northeast region often follows a predictable yet destructive cycle: a manipulated piece of content gains traction online, triggers heightened community tensions and is followed by real-world protests or violence. The dangers of this cycle are evident in recent history. During the 2023 Manipur ethnic clashes, a range of manipulated videos circulated rapidly on local social media channels, with many of these shared by young users and influencers. These materials shaped public perceptions of events on the ground and contributed to the escalation of violence. In one particularly volatile incident, photographs falsely claiming that two missing Meitei students — Phijam Hemanjit (20) and Hijam Linthoingambi (17), had been abducted and killed, went viral in Manipur, sparking large-scale student protests in Imphal within hours. The students had been missing since July 6, and the widely circulated images, showing them with armed men and later appearing lifeless, fueled public outrage. However, officials, including the state’s security advisor, clarified that the case was recorded as an abduction and that there was no confirmation of their deaths without physical evidence, highlighting how disinformation rapidly escalated tensions in the state.
Addressing disinformation in the Northeast requires moving beyond reactive measures and recognising that the region’s unique socio-political sensitivities demand both structural and community-based responses.
Content manipulation can seldom be limited to static images. During the same time period, Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated videos and doctored visuals were shared online to stoke communal fears. A fabricated video purporting to represent a confrontation between Assam Rifles and the state police had to be publicly debunked by the Indian Army, highlighting the undulated speed at which emotionally charged but unverified material can spread. Even when such disinformation does not provoke direct violence, it can destabilise local trust and fracture community relations.
India’s legal architecture for countering disinformation rests primarily on provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000, and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. These empower the government to request content takedowns, impose due diligence obligations on intermediaries, and set grievance redressal timelines. At the institutional level, enforcement is carried out by multiple actors, including State police cyber cells, tasked with investigating online offences; Platform-level moderation systems, which adhere to content policies and community guidelines.
However, this framework reflects two limitations. First, it is reactive, which implies interventions occur after the content is already in circulation. Second, it is content-centric rather than literacy-centric, focusing on removing problematic posts rather than equipping citizens to evaluate information critically before believing or sharing it.
In regions such as the Northeast, where levels of digital literacy have traditionally been relatively lower than in other parts of the country, takedowns, fact-checks, and legal penalties often lag behind the rapid spread of falsehoods. Media and information literacy (MIL), therefore, serves as a critical first line of defence and not simply a complementary safeguard.
For instance, the Assam Government, under Chief Minister (CM) Himanta Biswa Sarma, has emphasised the integration of skilling and technology readiness into the education system. Nonetheless, as technical skills are promoted, the educational capacity to critically evaluate information online must also be strengthened simultaneously. In the Northeast, the practical usage of smartphones and social media is widespread amongst the youth. However, there is limited structured training in verifying sources, recognising manipulation techniques, or understanding the influence of algorithms.
As a discipline and pedagogical approach, media and information literacy (MIL is yet to be embedded as a mandatory part of the public school curriculum in most Northeastern states. Some higher education institutions, such as the Indian Institute of Mass Communication’s (IIMC) Mizoram campus, offer specialised programmes and initiatives, such as NagaEd’s Livi AI platform, to integrate digital skills into secondary education. However, general MIL remains absent from mainstream syllabi, rendering large segments of the population devoid of the necessary skills to navigate the complexities of information ecosystems.
The Northeast’s linguistic diversity, spanning over 200 languages and dialects, presents another unique challenge to disinformation control. Platform-level content moderation systems are still mostly attuned to English, Hindi, and a few other major Indian languages. As a result, harmful narratives circulating in smaller local tongues often evade timely detection or fact-checking. Language in the Northeast is intricately intertwined with questions of identity, ethnicity, and political autonomy. Disinformation framed in the audience’s mother tongue can resonate more deeply, lending emotional credibility and amplifying inter-community tensions. Counter-narratives issued in non-local languages are less likely to be trusted or even widely understood. Without investing in local-language moderation tools and culturally adapted media literacy, any broader disinformation strategy in the region will remain incomplete.
Civil society organisations (CSOs) have stepped in to bridge some of these gaps. Despite their crucial role, NGOs and CSOs in the Northeast face significant constraints in embedding MIL at scale. According to a 2023 study, while numerous Northeastern NGOs use Information and Communication Technology (ICT) tools, most lack the funding, training infrastructure, and reach to deliver systematic MIL programmes across remote and linguistically diverse communities. Although government-affiliated bodies such as Meghalaya’s North East Centre for Technology Application and Reach (NECTAR)—a government autonomous body, conducts targeted tech training, its scope remains limited to select sectors (for example, telemedicine and agriculture) rather than community-wide digital literacy.
In the Northeast, MIL is not merely an educational tool; it is a peace-building necessity. A society equipped with the skills to question, verify, and contextualise information is less vulnerable to manipulation, whether by external actors or domestic opportunists.
Furthermore, while universities in the region have also long had departments devoted to journalism and media studies, these have traditionally prioritised professional training over public-oriented literacy. As a result, MIL provision remains fragmented and insufficient, leaving communities exposed to the risks of disinformation.
In the Northeast, MIL is not merely an educational tool; it is a peace-building necessity. A society equipped with the skills to question, verify, and contextualise information is less vulnerable to manipulation, whether by external actors or domestic opportunists. MIL initiatives in the Northeast must be linguistically inclusive, culturally sensitive, and tailored to local contexts. They should be embedded within school curricula from an early stage and reinforced through community workshops and public media campaigns. They must also be sustained over time, rather than implemented as one-off interventions in response to specific crises.
Addressing disinformation in the Northeast requires moving beyond reactive measures and recognising that the region’s unique socio-political sensitivities demand both structural and community-based responses. Legal frameworks and platform policies can only partially quell harm; a more enduring solution lies in building a digitally literate citizenry capable of discerning facts from embellished opinions and falsehoods. This entails embedding media and information literacy into school curricula, expanding community-led digital literacy rooted in regional languages, and working with local youth organisations, tribal councils, and women’s collectives to tailor content to cultural contexts. Concurrently, connectivity policies must evolve. Additionally, AI-powered moderation in local languages and improved grievance redressal systems can play a vital role.
Combining sustained literacy initiatives with proportionate, rights-respecting governance measures could advance both the informational resilience and democratic stability of the Northeast. In this high-stakes context, MIL is not just a civic skill but a democratic safeguard. It will enable communities to resist manipulation, engage in informed dialogue, and uphold the fragile but essential peace of the region.
Tanusha Tyagi is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Digital Societies, Observer Research Foundation
Debajyoti Chakravarty is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Digital Societies, Observer Research Foundation
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Tanusha Tyagi is a research assistant with the Centre for Digital Societies at ORF. Her research focuses on issues of emerging technologies, data protection and ...
Read More +
Debajyoti Chakravarty is a Research Assistant at ORF’s Center for New Economic Diplomacy (CNED) and is based at ORF Kolkata. His work focuses on the use ...
Read More +
PREV
