WhatsApp Suspends Over 9.8 Million Accounts In India In June, Cites Harmful Activity
WhatsApp banned more than 98 lakh accounts in India during June, as part of its efforts to curb abuse and harmful activity on the platform, according to WhatsApp's latest India Monthly Report.
Of these, nearly 19.79 lakh accounts were banned proactively, before any user complaints were received, the report stated.
In addition to banning accounts, WhatsApp also acted on grievances received from users in India.
During the month, the platform received 23,596 complaints through its grievance mechanisms, out of which action was taken against 1,001 accounts.
These actions included banning accounts or restoring previously banned accounts after reviewing complaints.
Most complaints were related to ban appeals, with 16,069 such cases reported, leading to action on 756 accounts.
Other categories included account support, product support, and safety-related issues, as per the report.
WhatsApp said its abuse detection works at three stages -- during account registration, while messaging, and in response to negative feedback such as user reports and blocks.
The company added that prevention is its primary focus, as stopping harmful activity before it happens is more effective than detecting it afterward.
The platform emphasised its commitment to user safety, saying it uses end-to-end encryption, safety tools, and dedicated teams to fight abuse, misinformation, and security threats.
It also works with experts to promote cybersecurity and protect election integrity, the messaging platform said in the report.
Meanwhile, last month, the messaging platform has introduced two new tools - 'Status Ads' and 'Promoted Channels'.
According to WABetaInfo, these features were available to select beta users on Android.
Status Ads work like Instagram Story ads. Now, business accounts can post paid content that will show up in people's Status updates.
These ads will appear between status updates from friends and family, with a clear "sponsored" label so people can easily spot them as ads.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
40 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Businessman duped of ₹8.75 crore in a forex trading fraud
Mumbai: The founder of a watch retail stores chain was duped of ₹8.75 crore in an alleged forex currency trading fraud. The accused claimed to be an executive of a leading financial technology company based in New York and lured the businessman to invest, promising huge profits, said a police officer. Businessman duped of ₹ 8.75 crore in a forex trading fraud According to the police, a woman approached the 58-year-old businessman, a resident of Matunga, through Facebook on May 18, claiming to be an executive of a leading financial technology company based in New York. She introduced him to a mobile application of the company for forex currency trade, assuring huge profits. When he expressed interest, she added him to a WhatsApp group where tips for trading were being shared. As he did not have any knowledge on investments, he asked the woman to add his daughter and his accountant to the WhatsApp group, said a police officer. She also shared a customer care number to contact in case of any problems, which was fake, he added. The police said that she then sent them a link and asked to open an account to start trading. 'They followed her instructions and started investing by transferring money to various bank accounts. Their investments and profits reflected in the application and they believed the woman,' the officer said. Between May 31 and July 8 this year, the businessman transferred ₹8.75 crores in 14 transactions. In July, the businessman received a text from an unknown number stating that he was being cheated in the name of forex currency trading. 'The unidentified person demanded 10% of the invested amount as commission to help him get his money back. When he tried to withdraw the profits that reflected on the app, he was asked to pay various charges to unlock his gains. When he contacted the person who alerted him, he told the businessman that he would help him only after receiving the commission. He didn't get carried away by him and approached the police for help,' the officer added. The businessman approached the police on Thursday, after which a case was registered against the unidentified individuals under sections 318 (cheating), 319 (cheating by personation), 336 (forgery), 338 (forgery of valuable security, wills, and related documents) and 340 (forgery of electronic records) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and relevant sections of the Information Technology Act.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Influencers log out—when the likes don't pay for the rent
After nine years of writing comedy scripts, shooting sketches, and chasing YouTube views, Om Suri hit pause. His channel 'Oye Omi' had nearly 73,000 subscribers, but not enough to pay his bills. Two months ago, he quit full-time content creation and is scouting for a regular job. Suri is not alone. As India's 8-million-strong creator economy gets overcrowded and unpredictable, many influencers, especially those with smaller followings, are quietly walking away from the spotlight. Shrinking advertisement revenue, inconsistent brand deals, and rising financial strain are driving creators back to the stability of traditional employment. Influencers, those who have built a dedicated following on digital platforms, are known to quit their regular jobs and pursue full-time content creation. But lately, this trend is reversing. With the millions of content creators competing for your attention and brand deals, the earnings are dwindling, and survival is becoming difficult by the day, especially for those with smaller followings or limited network to pull in regular brand work. The middle rung of influencers is the worst hit. Advertisement revenue on popular platforms like YouTube is often meagre, which influencers say ranges from $0.4 to $3 per thousand views. This financial crunch is making many creators abandon their influencer careers to return to traditional jobs. According to Suri, YouTube's financial sustainability is a challenge for many creators. "To make a living, you have to post consistently and get regular brand deals," he says. "Due to overcrowding, this has become a rat race, where all of us are competing for the same brand deals. However, brands only pick the top creators with the most followers." Suri also highlights the issues with brand collaborations. "Many brands that pay well also require the promotion of risky things such as betting or trading, which I personally rejected as a creator," he says. "Besides, larger creators are sought after, while smaller creators are mostly offered barter collaborations on Instagram, where you're only given products to promote for free; you don't earn." Indian influencers' advertisement revenues are paltry compared with their global peers. "Advertisers in India don't pay as much, so the AdSense revenue on YouTube is as low as $1 per thousand views – over 10 times lower than what is given globally," Suri says. "It is also difficult to compete against corporate giants who have created YouTube channels and creators who have a talent management agency and a team to produce content." Suri has applied to various companies and agencies for roles in creative fields such as writing, editing, or anchoring, leveraging the skills he picked up during content creation. The commerce graduate's goal now is to find a stable job that pays regularly. Aashish Gupta, another creator who zoomed out of his content journey to settle in as the talent manager of a more popular content creator, Elvish Yadav, points to a generational phenomenon of job security. 'While obviously, money is the primary factor for most creators who quit content like me, it is also the circumstances," he said. Gupta started creating content in 2018 while he was in college, and balanced it with other pursuits, including film and music production and corporate jobs. He, however, realized that content monetization has a short shelf-life. "The thing with content monetization is that it is a risky job, which one can do in their early 20s, wherein there are no responsibilities. But one can't sustain in it close to their 30s," he said. Gupta, who says he had financial commitments at home, highlights the challenges of inconsistent income and the favouring of top influencers. "This industry favours the top influencers with more followers and the ones who have a good network to get regular brand deals," he says. 'Otherwise, it is difficult to continue in this field because one month when we get a deal, we would earn around ₹10,000-20,000. But after that, we would struggle to make any money for a few months that followed... the inconsistency made it difficult to survive." Industry watchers believe that while the outflow of content creators is not alarming just yet, it reflects a deeper industry problem. "Over 2 lakh content creators have stopped producing content since 2024... This may look like a big number, but it is not alarming just yet if compared to the influx of new creators in the industry," says Anirudh Sridharan, co-founder of creator network Hashfame. Sridharan explains that the industry's growth is not likely to be hampered by this outflow, given the large number of active creators. "Against that, the outflow of 2-3% people is normal in any industry that is operating at such a scale, and it cannot hamper the growth of the industry," he says. He, however, warns this could become a bigger issue in future if the core problems are not addressed. According to Sridharan, the three primary reasons for creators quitting are mental strain, lack of monetization opportunities, and loss of relevance. "For tackling the monetization problem, we have to consider the content economy as a large army of GenZ workforce catering to their need, rather than looking at them just like a bunch of youngsters using their phones to make videos for social media," he says. Sridharan also highlights the need for more conscious investment from brands. "Brands have to invest more consciously, as currently this industry is very unorganized and operated on a manual model, where rarely do brands go beyond the creators that come on the top of their mind or are a part of their network to discover more creators," he said. This lack of discoverability leads to inconsistent income distribution, where the top 1% creators earn the largest portion of the ₹3,500 crore creator economy. He also noted that only a small percentage of creators can make a decent income. "Only 5-10% beyond that are able to make a decent income of say ₹50,000 per month," he said. The rest are either doing this part-time or struggling financially, and eventually, they may lose cultural relevance and be forced out of the business unless they constantly reinvent their content. Sandwich issue Brands say they prefer more established creators, who are more relevant because of the better return on investment (ROI) they provide with their solid metrics. However, they also say nano influencers, with sub-10,000 followers, charge incredibly low fees and even work on a barter basis in most cases, making them the second-best choice. Thus, brands mostly tap into these two categories, while leaving the rest of the influencers scrambling for deals. 'Purely from the lens of an ROI, celebrity influencers might command a premium fee, but they deliver unmatched top-of-funnel impact, typically driving a 3x–5x spike in brand searches and recall within days of a campaign. Their scale compresses the awareness curve, making them a solid financial bet when the objective is mass reach," said Murali Krishnan, chief marketing officer of food chain Wow! Momo. 'On the other end, nano influencers, consistently deliver 6–10% engagement rates, which is nearly 2–3x higher than mid-tier creators, and they do it at a fraction of the cost," Krishnan adds. "The challenge lies with mid-size micro- and macro-influencers, where their ability to deliver either deep influence or wide reach is getting diluted." The marketing chief said his brand is increasingly adopting a barbell strategy, putting major investments in celeb influencers for impact, and scaling up nano collaborations for frequency and grassroot authenticity, while being extremely selective with the middle-tier influencers, who are sandwiched between these two. Side hustles Instead of completely logging out, some content creators are creating content on the side, while focussing on their regular job. Take Macedon D'mello, who earlier created comedy-related content but has now pivoted to dance-related material on Instagram. He works full time in a digital marketing agency, while also taking up freelance choreography, acting and voice-over gigs. "One does not have to necessarily give up on content creation. I have a regular job but I continue to pursue content, create for brands and also freelance on the side," D'mello tells Mint. 'Content audience was at peak during covid, and at that time it made sense for creators to rely on it for their income completely. But if they didn't make it big, it is best for them to do it as a side hustle, while earning from other sources to balance their passion with their profession," D'mello adds. "These small creators, with 5,000-10,000 followers, who are also doing a 9-5 job with a stable income charge a basic amount… And for that, they deliver videos that are as aesthetic and polished as someone with 4–5 lakh followers. And brands get usage rights too, said Kunal Chhabhria, partner at CollabX Entertainment. Echoing Chhabhria's view, Zil Shah, a talent agent at the same firm says: 'Stability of income has become more important now. Some creators manage both, they shoot over weekends, edit at night, and work a 9-5 during the day. Others have taken a break from content completely. And this isn't a one-off case it's becoming quite common."
India Today
5 hours ago
- India Today
New rules for US student visas in 2025: Fee hike, social media checks and more
The big beautiful dream of studying in the United States is set to become tougher for international students, particularly those from India. Backed by former President Donald Trump, a series of new visa policies are changing the grounds of higher education migration. With higher fees, tighter screening, and stricter stay limits now on the table, students planning to pursue degrees in the US will need to prepare for added costs and closer VISA FEE INTRODUCEDAt the centre of the changes is the 'One Big Beautiful Bill', signed by Trump on July 4, 2025. The bill introduces a 'Visa Integrity Fee' of 250 USD (21,463) and a mandatory charge of 24 USD (2,060) for the Form I-94, a key document that tracks the movement of foreign charges are not optional, and they apply to all applicants under F (academic), M (vocational), and J (exchange) visas, the core categories for international education. Another mandatory charge now applies to the Form I-94, which is used to track entries and exits of foreign nationals. The new mandatory minimum fee for Form I-94 is 24 USD (around 2,060). Both fees apply to all applicants, including students from India applying for F, M, or J MEDIA NOW A SCREENING TOOLIn a policy that's gaining attention, the US Embassy in India recently directed all student visa applicants to make their social media profiles public during the visa application process. This applies to applicants for the F (academic), M (vocational), and J (exchange visitor) visa 2019, the US has required visa applicants to submit their social media handles as part of the application process. What's new is the emphasis on public visibility and the likely scrutiny of content shared on platforms such as Instagram, Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), and purpose, according to US officials, is to ensure transparency and detect any red flags that could indicate a risk of visa overstay or violation of TIME LIMITS PROPOSED FOR STUDENTS TO STAYA major policy proposal still under review is the introduction of fixed stay limits for student visas. At present, students holding F or J visas can stay in the US as long as they remain enrolled full-time. This is known as 'duration of status.'However, under the new proposal, the US government intends to introduce a fixed time frame, possibly 2 or 4 years, depending on the course and the expiration of this period, students would be required to apply for an extension to remain in the US. While the official rollout date has not been confirmed, sources suggest the implementation could begin before the end of IN THE US IN 2025: WHAT ELSE TO EXPECTadvertisementWhile Indian students continue to apply to US universities in large numbers, 2025 brings a slightly altered landscape. With US consulates already processing a record volume of visa appointments, delays are are advised to apply early, keep documentation updated, and be transparent about their digital trend is that community colleges and vocational training schools are under greater scrutiny, while applications from STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) fields continue to receive strong support from US institutions and universities have also made AI and climate-focused courses more prominent, reflecting global shifts in Indian students, the challenge is two-fold: navigating the evolving rules and preparing stronger applications.- Ends
