Sikhs Targeted by Fake Social Media Profiles, Investigation Reveals

Indian authorities have uncovered a sophisticated network of fake social media accounts masquerading as Sikh individuals while promoting Hindu nationalist and pro-government narratives. The operation, which spanned Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, appears to have been designed to “alter perceptions on important issues around Sikh independence, human rights and values,” according to Benjamin Strick, author of a report from the non-profit Centre for Information Resilience (CIR).

The network employed what experts call “sock puppet” accounts—fake profiles controlled by real people posing as independent individuals rather than automated bots. These accounts consistently used the hashtags #RealSikh to endorse certain political viewpoints and #FakeSikh to discredit others.

Many of the fraudulent accounts shared identical names, profile pictures, and content across multiple platforms. A significant number used profile images of celebrities, particularly actresses from the Punjabi film industry, without their consent. When contacted by the BBC, one celebrity’s management confirmed they were unaware their image had been misappropriated and planned to take action, while another indicated such impersonation was widespread and difficult to combat.

The timing of this discovery is particularly notable as it comes just as India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced the repeal of three controversial farm laws that had sparked a year of protests. According to the CIR report, the fake account network specifically targeted two major topics: the farmers’ protests and the Khalistan independence movement.

The accounts consistently portrayed advocates for Sikh independence as extremists and attempted to delegitimize the farmers’ protests by claiming they had been “hijacked by Khalistani terrorists.” This mirrors official Indian government claims that the protests had been “infiltrated by Khalistanis.”

Jagjit Singh Dalewal, leader of the Bharatiya Kisan Union, one of approximately 30 unions participating in the protests, believes the accounts were created at the government’s direction. “We believe these accounts were set up at the behest of the government and it was done to set a narrative against the protests,” he said.

Some accounts in the network also targeted Sikh diaspora communities in the UK and Canada, portraying them as hotbeds of Khalistani sentiment. What made this influence operation particularly effective was its success in engaging legitimate users. The accounts amassed thousands of followers, and their content was liked and retweeted by verified accounts of public figures and even quoted on news websites.

Nikhil Pahwa, a digital rights activist and editor of technology policy website MediaNama, noted that these influence operations target individuals with specific viewpoints. “These 80-odd accounts will not necessarily make something trend, but with consistent posting, they try to discredit a point of view,” he explained. “This seems to be a sophisticated approach, and seems to be a part of a larger operation.”

Interestingly, very little of the network’s content was in Punjabi—the primary language of Sikhs in India—with English being the predominant language used. This suggests the operation may have been targeting international perception rather than local opinion.

After the BBC shared the CIR report with the relevant platforms, Twitter suspended the accounts for violating their rules on “platform manipulation” and fake accounts. A Twitter spokesperson stated, “At this time, there’s no evidence of widespread co-ordination, the use of multiple accounts by single people, or other platform manipulation tactics.”

Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, also removed the identified accounts for violating “inauthentic behaviour” policies. A Meta spokesperson said the accounts “misled people about the origin and popularity of their content and used fake accounts to spam people and evade our enforcement.”

While there is no direct evidence linking this network to the Indian government, which has not responded to BBC requests for comment, the coordinated nature of the operation and its political objectives raise questions about potential state involvement in online influence campaigns targeting minority communities.