Asian News International#Bias and propaganda

Prem Prakash started his career in the field of photography, working for Visnews (and Reuters) as a photojournalist, where he went on to cover some of the most significant historical events in post-independence India.{{Cite web |url=https://caravanmagazine.in/reportage/ani-reports-government-version-truth |title=The Image Makers : How ANI Reports The Government's Version Of Truth |last=Donthi |first=Praveen |date=1 March 2019 |website=The Caravan |language=en |url-access=subscription |access-date=13 April 2025 |archive-date=24 July 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190724155425/https://caravanmagazine.in/reportage/ani-reports-government-version-truth }}{{Cite web |last1=Ahluwalia |first1=Harveen |last2=Srivilasan |first2=Pranav |date=21 October 2018 |title=How ANI quietly built a monopoly |url=https://the-ken.com/story/ani-video-news-monopoly/ |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230116213511/https://the-ken.com/story/ani-video-news-monopoly/ |archive-date=16 January 2023 |access-date=28 December 2019 |website=The Ken |language=en-US}} A significant figure in the domain of news and documentary film-making by the 1970s, he commanded considerable respect among foreign journalists and film-makers, and received the MBE. In 1971, Prem established ANI (initially TVNF, India's first television news feature agency), which gained influence within the Congress Government. TVNF played a key role in fulfilling Indira Gandhi's wishes of showcasing a positive image of India. It produced numerous films for Doordarshan and went on to gain a monopoly in the sector.

Smita Prakash, an alumna of the Indian Institute of Mass Communication, joined ANI in 1986 as an intern and later became a full-time employee. The daughter of Inna Ramamohan Rao, former director of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting married Prem's son Sanjiv in 1988, which furthered ANI's access within the government. In 1993, Reuters purchased a stake in ANI, and it was allowed to exert a complete monopoly over their India feed.

By 2000, India saw a boom of private 24/7 news channels; however, unsustainable revenue models meant that they lacked the capacity to hire video-reporters across the country. This allowed a massive expansion of ANI's domestic video-production capacities at the behest of Sanjiv, who rose through the ranks. Smita also rose through the ranks with him. Asian Films TV was incorporated in 2000 to provide feed for newspapers and periodicals. The Caravan though notes that most of its foot-soldiers were low-cost recruits, who had little to do with journalism.

In 2000, the NDA government launched DD Kashir, a Kashmir-based regional channel, and ANI was allowed to produce its programs. By the end of 2005, ANI's business-model was faring impressively on a consistent basis and it shifted its office out of Gole Market, to a new five-storey building in R. K. Puram. ANI continued to be trusted by the upcoming UPA governments, to the extent that the Ministry of External Affairs chose Smita to be a part of the two-member contingent of Indian journalists at both of the joint press conferences between the incumbent prime ministers of India and the United States.

In the later 2000s, the increasing charges for ANI feed and low quality of its journalism, coupled with the introduction of broadcast vans, led to several national and regional channels unsubscribing ANI. The launch of UNI TV in 2010 by Yashwant Deshmukh gave stiff competition as well. However, Ishaan Prakash, Smita's son who joined the company in 2011, procured multiple units of LiveU, expanded ANI's overseas bureaus and signed contracts with multiple state governments and union ministries. A monopoly was again re-created and most of its competitors eventually shut down. By late 2011, ANI accounted for about 99% of the Reuters feed from India, and in FY 2017–18, it was paid {{currency|2.54|INR}} crore for the services. Archive videos were sold at rates as high as {{INRConvert|1000|year=2017}} per second; in FY 2017–18, the firm reported revenues of {{INRConvert|68.23|c|year=2017}} and a net profit of {{INRConvert|9.91|c|year=2017}}.

Under new management, ANI has been accused of practising an aggressive model of journalism focused on maximum revenue output where journalists were considered dispensable. Multiple employees have accused ANI of not having any human resource management system and ill-treatment of ex-employees.

In July 2024, ANI sued Press Trust of India over copyright infringement alleging that it had plagiarised ANI's video clips of Spicejet aircraft's AC breakdown, and sought {{INRConvert|2|c|year=2024}} in damages.{{Cite news |date=5 July 2024 |title='Stealing my feeds': ANI sues PTI for plagiarism, copyright breach, seeks Rs 2 crore |url=https://www.newslaundry.com/2024/07/05/stealing-my-feeds-ani-sues-pti-for-plagiarism-copyright-breach-seeks-rs-2-crore |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240909143313/https://www.newslaundry.com/2024/07/05/stealing-my-feeds-ani-sues-pti-for-plagiarism-copyright-breach-seeks-rs-2-crore |archive-date=9 September 2024 |access-date=9 September 2024 |work=Newslaundry}}

In September 2024, ANI sued Netflix over the web series IC 814: The Kandahar Hijack for copyright infringement, alleging that the latter had used video clips in its Kandahar Hijack series without ANI's permission.{{Cite news |date=9 September 2024 |title='Brandname being tarnished': ANI sues Netflix for using its content in 'Kandahar Hijack' series |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/brandname-being-tarnished-ani-sues-netflix-for-using-its-content-in-kandahar-hijack-series/articleshow/113190274.cms |access-date=9 September 2024 |work=The Times of India}}

{{Main|Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation}}

In July 2024, ANI filed a lawsuit against the Wikimedia Foundation in the Delhi High Court—claiming to have been defamed in the Wikipedia article about the agency—and sought {{INRConvert|2|c|year=2024}} in damages.{{cite news |last1=Khan |first1=Khadija |title=Why has ANI slapped a defamation case against Wikipedia? |url=https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-law/why-has-ani-slapped-a-defamation-case-against-wikipedia-9443391/ |access-date=11 July 2024 |work=The Indian Express |date=10 July 2024 |language=en |archive-date=14 July 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240714172651/https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-law/why-has-ani-slapped-a-defamation-case-against-wikipedia-9443391/ |url-status=live}}{{cite web |title=ANI files defamation suit against Wikipedia, seeks Rs 2 cr in damages |url=https://www.siasat.com/ani-files-defamation-suit-against-wikipedia-seeks-rs-2-cr-in-damages-3058599/ |website=The Siasat Daily |date=9 July 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240709090900/https://www.siasat.com/ani-files-defamation-suit-against-wikipedia-seeks-rs-2-cr-in-damages-3058599/ |archive-date=9 July 2024 |url-status=live |access-date=9 July 2024 |language=en}}{{cite web |title=News agency ANI files Rs 2 crore defamation suit against Wikipedia in Delhi High Court |url=https://www.deccanherald.com/business/companies/news-agency-ani-files-rs-2-crore-defamation-suit-against-wikipedia-in-delhi-high-court-3098159 |website=Deccan Herald |date=9 July 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240709090858/https://www.deccanherald.com/business/companies/news-agency-ani-files-rs-2-crore-defamation-suit-against-wikipedia-in-delhi-high-court-3098159 |archive-date=9 July 2024 |url-status=live |access-date=9 July 2024 |language=en}} At the time of the suit's filing, the Wikipedia article about ANI said the news agency had "been accused of having served as a propaganda tool for the incumbent central government, distributing materials from a vast network of fake news websites, and misreporting events on multiple occasions". The filing accused Wikipedia of publishing "false and defamatory content with the malicious intent of tarnishing the news agency's reputation, and aimed to discredit its goodwill".{{cite web |title=ANI Sues Wikipedia for Defamation, Demands INR 2 Crore |url=https://www.medianama.com/2024/07/223-ani-sues-wikipedia-defamation-demands-rs-2-crore/ |website=MediaNama |date=2024-07-10 |last1=Parasnis |first1=Sharveya |access-date=26 October 2024 |language=en-US |archive-date=6 November 2024 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20241106210646/https://www.medianama.com/2024/07/223-ani-sues-wikipedia-defamation-demands-rs-2-crore/ |url-status=live }}{{Cite news |last=Deep |first=Aroon |date=2024-07-12 |title=Content determined by volunteer editors, says Wikipedia parent |url=https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/wikipedia-parent-responds-ani-defamation-suit-says-content-by-volunteer-editors/article68395472.ece |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.today/20240801120147/https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/wikipedia-parent-responds-ani-defamation-suit-says-content-by-volunteer-editors/article68395472.ece |archive-date=1 August 2024 |access-date=26 October 2024 |work=The Hindu |language=en-IN |issn=0971-751X}}

On 5{{nbsp}}September, the court threatened to hold Wikimedia guilty of contempt for failing to disclose information about the editors who had made changes to the article and warned that Wikipedia might be blocked in India upon further non-compliance. The judge on the case{{Who|date=April 2025}} stated, "If you don't like India, please don't work in India … We will ask government to block Wikipedia in India."{{cite news |author= |title=Will ask government to block Wikipedia: Delhi High Court issues contempt order in ANI case |url=https://www.deccanherald.com/india/delhi/will-ask-government-to-block-wikipedia-delhi-high-court-issues-contempt-order-in-ani-case-3177771 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240905101222/https://www.deccanherald.com/india/delhi/will-ask-government-to-block-wikipedia-delhi-high-court-issues-contempt-order-in-ani-case-3177771 |archive-date=5 September 2024 |url-status=live |work=Deccan Herald |access-date=5 September 2024}}{{Cite news |last=Kakkar |first=Shruti |date=5 September 2024 |title=Delhi HC pulls up Wikipedia for non-compliance of order |url=https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/delhi-news/delhi-hc-pulls-up-wikipedia-for-non-compliance-of-order-101725545466043.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240905190702/https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/delhi-news/delhi-hc-pulls-up-wikipedia-for-non-compliance-of-order-101725545466043.html |archive-date=5 September 2024 |access-date=9 September 2024 |work=Hindustan Times}} In response, Wikimedia emphasised that the information in the article was supported by multiple reliable secondary sources.{{Cite news |date=5 September 2024 |title=Delhi High Court cautions Wikipedia for non-compliance of order |url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/delhi-high-court-cautions-wikipedia-for-non-compliance-of-order/article68610761.ece |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240914011253/https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/delhi-high-court-cautions-wikipedia-for-non-compliance-of-order/article68610761.ece |archive-date=14 September 2024 |access-date=15 September 2024 |work=The Hindu |language=en-IN |issn=0971-751X}} Justice Manmohan said "I think nothing can be worse for a news agency than to be called a puppet of an intelligence agency, stooge of the government. If that is true, the credibility goes."{{Clarify |reason = What news agency? Who is calling them a puppet? Of whom?|date=April 2025}}{{cite news |title=Nothing worse than calling news agency a government stooge: Delhi High Court in ANI vs Wikipedia |url=https://www.barandbench.com/news/nothing-worse-than-calling-news-agency-govt-stooge-delhi-high-court-ani-wikipedia |date=2024-10-21 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20241106210840/https://www.barandbench.com/news/nothing-worse-than-calling-news-agency-govt-stooge-delhi-high-court-ani-wikipedia |archive-date=2024-11-06 |url-status=live |work=Bar and Bench |last1=Srivastava |first1=Bhavini |access-date=21 October 2024 |language=en}}

On 21{{nbsp}}October, the Wikimedia Foundation suspended access to the article about the ongoing court case due to an order from the court,{{cite news |title=Wikipedia suspends page on the ongoing defamation lawsuit filed by ANI against Wikimedia Foundation |url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/wikipedia-suspends-access-to-ani-defamation-case-page-following-delhi-hc-order/article68778075.ece |date=2024-10-21 |work=The Hindu |last1=Deep |first1=Aroon |access-date=26 October 2024 |language=en-IN |issn=0971-751X}} which is likely the first time an English Wikipedia page had been taken down after a court order.{{cite news |last1=Poddar |first1=Umang |title=Wikipedia v ANI: Why the online encyclopaedia has landed in legal trouble in India |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdrdydkypv7o |date=30 October 2024 |access-date=30 October 2024 |work=BBC |archive-date=2 November 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241102004434/https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdrdydkypv7o |url-status=live }}

On 28{{nbsp}}October, the Wikimedia Foundation agreed to the court's request to disclose the identifying information of online users involved in editing the ANI page.{{Cite web |last=Rahman |first=Shaikh Azizur |date=2024-11-03 |title=Wikipedia embroiled in legal battle in India |url=https://www.voanews.com/a/wikipedia-embroiled-in-legal-battle-in-india/7849693.html |access-date=2024-11-10 |website=Voice of America |language=en |archive-date=10 November 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241110041949/https://www.voanews.com/a/wikipedia-embroiled-in-legal-battle-in-india/7849693.html |url-status=live }} An arrangement was reached in the High Court on 11{{nbsp}}November to have the foundation serving the summons papers to the involved users as an intermediary while disclosing the email identities of the users under sealed cover to the judge, which would still protect the privacy of the individuals for the time being.{{cite web |title=Delhi High Court allows Wikipedia to serve summons on users in ANI's defamation suit |url=https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/delhi-high-court-allows-wikipedia-serve-summons-users-ani-defamation-suit |website=Bar and Bench |date=2024-11-11 |last1=Srivastava |first1=Bhavini |access-date=2024-11-19 |language=en}}{{cite web |title=Delhi High Court issues summons to Wikipedia users in ANI's defamation suit |url=https://www.barandbench.com/news/delhi-high-court-issues-summons-wikipedia-users-ani-defamation-suit |website=Bar and Bench |date=2024-11-14 |last1=Srivastava |first1=Bhavini |access-date=2024-11-19 |language=en}} On 17{{nbsp}}March 2025, a two-judge bench, consisting of A. S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan of the Supreme Court of India reviewed a plea filed by WMF against the article takedown order by the Delhi High Court. It took note of the fact that matter involved freedom of media and questioned the High Court on why it was "so touchy" about the subject.{{cite web |title=Courts have to be tolerant: Supreme Court on Delhi HC's takedown order against Wikipedia in ANI case |url=https://www.barandbench.com/news/courts-have-to-tolerant-supreme-court-delhi-hc-takedown-order-against-wikipedia-ani-case |website=Bar and Bench |date=2025-03-17 |last1=Jamal |first1=Ummar |access-date=17 March 2025}} The panel questioned the Delhi High Court's decision, stating that judges and courts should be more tolerant of criticism; requiring the removal of content because of criticism may not be correct. The judges also stated that the order was about press freedom broadly and said it was "ironical" that an organisation reliant on press freedom (referring to ANI) is trying to censor content on Wikipedia.{{cite web |title=SC slams Delhi HC order directing Wikipedia to remove ANI defamation case page |url=https://www.thenewsminute.com/news/sc-slams-delhi-hc-order-directing-wikipedia-to-remove-ani-defamation-case-page |website=The News Minute |date=2025-03-18 |access-date=2025-04-10 |language=en}}{{cite web |title=Supreme Court questions legality of Delhi HC's order directing removal of Wikipedia page on ANI defamation suit |url=https://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/2025/Mar/17/supreme-court-questions-legality-of-delhi-hcs-order-directing-removal-of-wikipedia-page-on-ani-defamation-suit |website=The New Indian Express |date=2025-03-17 |access-date=2025-04-10 |language=en}}{{cite web |title=ANI vs. Wikipedia Legal Battle Explained |url=https://thephilox.com/ani-vs-wikipedia-legal-battle-explained/ |website=The Philox |date=2025-03-19 |last1=Sharma |first1=Aditya |access-date=2025-04-10 |language=en-US}}

On 2{{nbsp}}April, the Delhi High Court ordered the Wikimedia Foundation to remove the allegedly defamatory content, remove the article's protected status, and "restrain the platform's users and administrators from publishing anything defamatory against the news agency".{{Cite web |last=Thapliyal |first=Nupur |date=2025-04-02 |title=Delhi High Court Orders Removal Of Allegedly Defamatory Description Of ANI On Its Wikipedia Page |url=https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/delhi-high-court/delhi-high-court-ani-defamatory-wikipedia-page-removal-288188 |access-date=2025-04-02 |website=Live Law |language=en}} An appeal of the order was denied on 8 April, though the court slightly revised the order.{{cite news |title=Remove defamatory content about ANI, Delhi HC tells Wikipedia |url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/remove-defamatory-content-about-ani-delhi-hc-tells-wikipedia/article69427896.ece |access-date=10 April 2025 |work=The Hindu |date=8 April 2025 |language=en-IN}}

In November 2024, Asian News International sued OpenAI for allegedly reusing the former's content for model training, as well as allegedly creating false stories attributed to the agency. ANI also sought {{INRConvert|2|c|year=2024}} in damages.{{cite web |title=Indian News Agency Sues OpenAI for Copyright Violation |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-11-19/indian-news-agency-sues-openai-for-copyrighted-content-violation |website=Bloomberg News |date=2024-11-19 |last1=Mahajan |first1=Shruti |access-date=2024-11-20}}{{cite news |title=Indian news agency ANI sues OpenAI for unsanctioned content use in AI training |url=https://www.reuters.com/technology/artificial-intelligence/indian-news-agency-ani-sues-openai-unsanctioned-content-use-ai-training-2024-11-19/ |date=2024-11-19 |work=Reuters |last1=Chaturvedi |first1=Arpan |last2=Vengattil |first2=Munsif |access-date=20 November 2024}} The lawsuit alleged that while some of ANI's content was publicly accessible, certain news items and reports were only available to subscribers, and OpenAI had no right to use this material without a license. ANI also claimed that ChatGPT had produced responses attributing false interviews to the agency, including an interview with Rahul Gandhi that never took place. OpenAI defended its practices, stating that its actions were legal and transparent, and argued that it had not accessed any subscription-only content. The company also raised questions about territorial jurisdiction, noting that it had no physical presence in India.{{cite web |last=Mittal |first=Vaishali |title=ANI v OpenAI: A copyright, AI training and false attribution dispute |url=https://law.asia/ani-vs-openai-legal-case/ |archive-url=https://archive.today/20241220161845/https://law.asia/ani-vs-openai-legal-case/ |website=law.asia |date=2024-12-05 |access-date=2024-12-20 |archive-date=2024-12-20}}

In October 2024, before the lawsuit was filed, OpenAI had blocked ANI through its opt-out policy, which allows websites to opt out of automated use of their text by web scrapers. However, ANI argued this was ineffective as their content was still accessible through third-party content syndication. The case raised questions about India's approach to AI and copyright law, as the country's fair use provisions did not directly reference AI training models. OpenAI defended against claims of verbatim reproduction by arguing that copyright protects expression rather than ideas or facts, and that its models sufficiently modified the original expression to claim copyright exceptions.{{cite news |title=The significance of ANI versus OpenAI |url=https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/the-significance-of-ani-versus-openai/article68970472.ece |date=2024-12-11 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20241211070741/https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/the-significance-of-ani-versus-openai/article68970472.ece#selection-1935.1-1965.12 |archive-date=2024-12-11 |url-status=live |work=The Hindu |last1=Panday |first1=Jyoti |last2=Jain |first2=Saumya |access-date=2024-12-20}} The Delhi High Court heard the case first on 19 November 2024, and then again on 28 January 2025.

A long-form report in The Caravan, in 2019, described ANI as having "a disturbing history of producing blatant propaganda for the state".{{Cite web |last=Tiwari |first=Ayush |date=18 September 2019 |title=Meet ANI's 'European experts' on Kashmir. They're experts all right — just not on Kashmir |url=https://www.newslaundry.com/2019/09/18/ani-news-european-experts-kashmir |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200111140324/https://www.newslaundry.com/2019/09/18/ani-news-european-experts-kashmir |archive-date=11 January 2020 |access-date=4 January 2019 |website=Newslaundry}} According to The Caravan, for decades under Congress rule, ANI effectively served as the external publicity division of the Ministry of External Affairs, showing the army in a positive light and suppressing news about any internal discontent; the private nature of the organisation and the repute of its founder gave an air of non-partisan legitimacy to their videos. During the peak spans of militancy in the Kashmir conflict, ANI was the near-sole purveyor of video-footage, especially with Rao having been recruited as the media advisor to the state. ANI grew even closer to the government after the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) was elected to power in 2014; effects have ranged from sympathetic covering of the political campaigns by the BJP to reporters being highly confrontational when dealing with politicians from opposition parties.{{Cite news |last=Dhillon |first=Amrit |date=5 January 2019 |title=Indian PM lampooned for 'manufactured' interview |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/05/indian-pm-narendra-modi-lampooned-for-manufactured-interview |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240711014004/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/05/indian-pm-narendra-modi-lampooned-for-manufactured-interview |archive-date=11 July 2024 |access-date=29 December 2019 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}} ANI journalists are generally the only members of non-state media organisations to accompany Modi on foreign trips.{{cite web |title=ANI's news business: 'PR' contracts with CMs, podcasts and a quest for power |url=https://www.newslaundry.com/2024/04/08/anis-news-business-pr-contracts-with-cms-podcasts-and-a-quest-for-power |website=Newslaundry |date=2024-04-08 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241112221824/https://www.newslaundry.com/2024/04/08/anis-news-business-pr-contracts-with-cms-podcasts-and-a-quest-for-power |archive-date=2024-11-12 |url-status=live |last1=Rajpurohit |first1=Shivnarayan |access-date=2024-11-13 |language=en}} According to an investigation by Newslaundry, ANI was involved in contract negotiations with the chief ministers of several states for a "PR package" to provide coverage by ANI in exchange for payment.

A 2019 Association for Computing Machinery conference paper that analysed the Twitter activity of BJP members of parliament identified that "the highest levels of engagement are with those [accounts] known to be pro-ruling party—ie the party media mouthpiece (BJP Live), the two national news outlets—Doordarshan and All India Radio, and the ruling party-aligned Asian News International (ANI)".{{cite conference |last1=Lalani |first1=Faisal M. |last2=Kommiya Mothilal |first2=Ramaravind |last3=Pal |first3=Joyojeet |title=The Appeal of Influencers to the Social Media Outreach of Indian Politicians |book-title=CSCW '19 Companion: Companion Publication of the 2019 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing |date=9 November 2019 |pages=267–271 |url=https://joyojeet.people.si.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Appeal-of-Influencers.pdf |publisher=Association for Computing Machinery |isbn=978-1-4503-6692-2 |doi=10.1145/3311957.3359484 |access-date=30 December 2024 |via=Joyojeet Pal}}

According to Newslaundry, ANI consistently reveals the religion of Muslims accused of crimes, while generally omitting this information if the accused is Hindu. After the enactment of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, an Alt News report showed that among protests outside India in response to the legislation, ANI's coverage only included protests in support of the legislation while excluding protests that opposed it.{{cite web |last1=Mehta |first1=Archit |last2=Parmar |first2=Kinjal |title=Media analysis: ANI's skewed coverage of CAA protests abroad |url=https://www.altnews.in/media-analysis-anis-skewed-coverage-of-caa-protests-abroad/ |website=Alt News |access-date=29 December 2024 |date=6 February 2020}}{{cite journal |last1=Dorjee |first1=Tenzin |last2=Ting-Toomey |first2=Stella |title=Understanding Intergroup Conflict Complexity: An Application of the Socioecological Framework and the Integrative Identity Negotiation Theory |journal=Negotiation and Conflict Management Research |date=20 July 2020 |volume=13 |issue=3 |pages=244–262 |doi=10.1111/ncmr.12190 |publisher=Wiley |quote=On the other hand, Archit Mehta and Kinjal’s media report analysis in Alt News found that the Asian News International or ANI based in New Delhi positively skewed their reports on CAA in various cities abroad. These include Edinburgh, Scotland; London, U.K.; New York, Chicago, and Washington, D.C., U.S.A.; and Tokyo, Japan. ANI failed to report even one single anti-CAA protest abroad|doi-access=free }}

In 2020, an investigation by EU DisinfoLab, a non-profit disinformation watchdog, concluded that ANI was publishing pro-Modi government disinformation with opinion pieces and news content, including opinion pieces falsely attributed to European politicians, and that they were sourcing material from a vast network of fake news websites run by the "Srivastava Group". The report also concluded that they had spread anti-Pakistan and sometimes anti-China disinformation with the primary aim of this fake news coverage being to "discredit Pakistan" in international forums.{{cite news |last1=Saeed |first1=Saim |last2=Kayali |first2=Laura |date=9 December 2020 |title=New pro-India EU website enrolling MEPs campaigns against Pakistan |url=https://www.politico.eu/article/india-pakistan-website-european-parliament-campaign-eu-chronicle-china/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210106123319/https://www.politico.eu/article/india-pakistan-website-european-parliament-campaign-eu-chronicle-china/ |archive-date=6 January 2021 |access-date=9 December 2020 |work=Politico}}{{cite web |title=EU Non-Profit Unearths Massive Indian Disinformation Campaign |url=https://thediplomat.com/2020/12/eu-non-profit-unearths-massive-indian-disinformation-campaign/ |website=The Diplomat |date=12 October 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221112173403/https://thediplomat.com/2020/12/eu-non-profit-unearths-massive-indian-disinformation-campaign/ |archive-date=12 November 2022 |url-status=live |last1=Rej |first1=Abhijnan |access-date=11 December 2020 |language=en-US}}{{cite web |title=Indian Chronicles: deep dive into a 15-year operation targeting the EU and UN to serve Indian interests |url=https://www.disinfo.eu/publications/indian-chronicles-deep-dive-into-a-15-year-operation-targeting-the-eu-and-un-to-serve-indian-interests/ |website=Disinfo.eu |date=2020-12-09 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230124180136/https://www.disinfo.eu/publications/indian-chronicles-deep-dive-into-a-15-year-operation-targeting-the-eu-and-un-to-serve-indian-interests/ |archive-date=2023-01-24 |url-status=live |last1=Alaphilippe |first1=Gary Machado Alexandre |last2=Adamczyk |first2=Roman |last3=Grégoire |first3=Antoine |access-date=11 December 2020 |language=en-GB}}{{cite web |title=ANI, Srivastava Group named in massive EU disinformation campaign to promote Modi government's interests |url=https://caravanmagazine.in/media/ani-srivastava-group-named-in-eu-disinformation-campaign-to-promote-modi-govts-interests |website=The Caravan |date=9 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201210170759/https://caravanmagazine.in/media/ani-srivastava-group-named-in-eu-disinformation-campaign-to-promote-modi-govts-interests |archive-date=10 December 2020 |url-status=live |access-date=11 December 2020 |language=en}}{{cite news |title=Une vaste campagne de désinformation et d'influence indienne en Europe dévoilée |url=https://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs/article/2020/12/09/une-vaste-campagne-de-desinformation-et-d-influence-indienne-en-europe-devoilee_6062761_4355770.html |date=9 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201211084839/https://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs/article/2020/12/09/une-vaste-campagne-de-desinformation-et-d-influence-indienne-en-europe-devoilee_6062761_4355770.html |archive-date=11 December 2020 |url-status=live |work=Le Monde |last1=Sénécat |first1=Adrien |access-date=11 December 2020 |language=fr}} The report noted that mainstream Indian news media regularly relies on content provided by ANI, and that ANI had on several occasions provided legitimacy and coverage to the entire "influence operation" run by the fake news network, which relied "more on ANI than on any other distribution channel" [to give it] "both credibility and a wide reach to its content". ANI is also believed to have gained access to India's intelligence establishment in recent years; in foreign affairs many of its videos depicted protests by fringe lobby groups and activists as if they were large-scale and mainstream.

A later investigation by EU DisinfoLab in 2023 found that ANI had consistently quoted think tanks and experts associated with the Srivastava Group that did not appear to actually exist.

Fact checkers certified by the Poynter Institute's International Fact-Checking Network have accused ANI of misreporting events.{{Cite web |last=Chaudhuri |first=Pooja |date=21 October 2018 |title=ANI – A tale of inadvertent errors and oversights |url=https://www.altnews.in/ani-a-tale-of-inadvertent-errors-and-oversights/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221204021640/https://www.altnews.in/ani-a-tale-of-inadvertent-errors-and-oversights/ |archive-date=4 December 2022 |access-date=28 December 2019 |website=Alt News |language=en-GB}} The Caravan found several pieces of video footage from ANI, wherein logos of random television channels from Pakistan, along with Urdu tickers, were superimposed on news showcasing India in a positive light; their video editors have admitted to forging clips.

In July 2021, ANI falsely reported that Chinese weightlifter Hou Zhihui, who won the gold medal in the women's 49 kg weightlifting at the 2020 Summer Olympics in Tokyo, would be tested by the International Testing Agency (ITA) for doping, according to ANI's unnamed source. The article also stated that Indian weightlifter Mirabai Chanu, who won silver medal in the same event, would be upgraded to a gold medal if the tests were positive. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and ITA debunked the reports, saying they knew nothing of such tests being carried out and that any developments would be transparently reported on their website.{{cite web |title=Indian media fake news about Olympic weightlifting doping takes off around Asia - Insidethegames.biz |url=https://theverified.date/indian-media-fake-news-about-olympic-weightlifting-doping-takes-off-around-asia-insidethegames-biz/ |website=theverified.date |date=2021-07-29 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210803023839/https://theverified.date/indian-media-fake-news-about-olympic-weightlifting-doping-takes-off-around-asia-insidethegames-biz/ |archive-date=2021-08-03 |url-status=dead}}{{Cite web |url=https://www.boomlive.in/explainers/tokyo-olympics-2020-mirabai-chanu-zhihui-hou-doping-ani-india-today-boria-majumdar-14122 |title=Unverified Doping Charge Against Mirabai Chanu's Opponent Goes Viral |newspaper=Boom |first=Dilip |last=Unnikrishnan |date=1 August 2021 |access-date=9 September 2024 |archive-date=3 August 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210803023851/https://www.boomlive.in/explainers/tokyo-olympics-2020-mirabai-chanu-zhihui-hou-doping-ani-india-today-boria-majumdar-14122 |url-status=live}}

In April 2023, ANI falsely reported a photo of a padlocked grave in Hyderabad, India, as being from Pakistan, claiming it was locked to prevent necrophilia. Fact-checking revealed that the grave was actually secured to prevent unauthorised burials and to protect it from being trampled.{{cite web |author= |title=Photo of Hyderabad grave falsely reported as being from Pakistan |url=https://www.siasat.com/photo-of-hyderabad-grave-falsely-reported-as-being-from-pakistan-2579518/ |website=The Siasat Daily |date=30 April 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240909132649/https://www.siasat.com/photo-of-hyderabad-grave-falsely-reported-as-being-from-pakistan-2579518/ |archive-date=9 September 2024 |url-status=live |access-date=5 September 2024 |language=en}} In July 2023, ANI falsely blamed Muslims for the sexual assault and rape of two Kuki women during the 2023 Manipur violence. ANI later apologised for the mistake, blaming erroneous reading of tweets posted by the Manipur police.{{cite news |author= |title=Kuki viral video: ANI apologises for 'inadvertently' claiming Muslim man was arrested |url=https://www.newslaundry.com/2023/07/21/kuki-viral-video-ani-apologises-for-inadvertently-claiming-muslim-man-was-arrested |date=21 July 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230722142452/https://www.newslaundry.com/2023/07/21/kuki-viral-video-ani-apologises-for-inadvertently-claiming-muslim-man-was-arrested |archive-date=22 July 2023 |url-status=live |work=Newslaundry |access-date=22 July 2023 |language=en}}

In August 2024, ANI disseminated misinformation regarding attacks on Hindus in Bangladesh. The controversy erupted after ANI shared a video on social media, which falsely claimed that a man who was seeking justice for his missing son was a Hindu—he was Muslim.{{cite web |author= |title=ANI Faces Criticism for Sharing Fake Video About Attack on Hindus in Bangladesh |url=https://clarionindia.net/ani-faces-criticism-for-sharing-fake-news-about-attack-on-hindus-in-bangladesh/ |website=clarionindia.net |date=14 August 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240905142147/https://clarionindia.net/ani-faces-criticism-for-sharing-fake-news-about-attack-on-hindus-in-bangladesh/ |archive-date=5 September 2024 |url-status=live |access-date=5 September 2024 |language=en-US}}{{cite web |title=ANI faces backlash for sharing fake news on attack on Hindus in Bangladesh |url=https://english.varthabharati.in/india/ani-faces-backlash-for-sharing-fake-news-on-attack-on-hindus-in-bangladesh |website=Varthabharathi |date=2024-08-14 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240815143752/https://english.varthabharati.in/india/ani-faces-backlash-for-sharing-fake-news-on-attack-on-hindus-in-bangladesh |archive-date=2024-08-15 |url-status=live |last1=Bharathi |first1=Vartha |access-date=5 September 2024 |language=en}} The video, initially shared by ANI, was quickly picked up by right-wing accounts and other media outlets that rely on ANI's feed, further spreading the false narrative. Despite ANI deleting the video after being called out for the misleading content, the misinformation continued to circulate on various social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, perpetuating the false narrative.

• United News of India, multilingual news agency in India

{{reflist}}

{{commonscatinline}}

• {{official website}}

{{News agencies}}

{{authority control}}

Category:Companies based in New Delhi

Category:Indian companies established in 1971

Category:Multilingual news services

Category:News agencies based in India