The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology has released a draft of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Second Amendment Rules, 2026, inviting public comments until April 2026. While the stated objective is to create a safer and more accountable digital ecosystem, the current framework appears to focus primarily on news and current affairs content circulating on digital platforms. This approach, though important, addresses only a limited segment of the broader information landscape that shapes public opinion and behavior in today’s digital age.
A deeper concern lies in the vast and rapidly expanding domains where misinformation can have direct and tangible consequences on citizens’ lives, such as financial advice, healthcare guidance, legal awareness and lifestyle decision-making. Therefore, it becomes essential to examine what additional dimensions should be incorporated into the regulatory framework to ensure a more comprehensive, balanced and future-ready approach to safeguarding public interest in the digital era.
The Rise of an Unregulated Power Structure
The global digital ecosystem has undergone a profound transformation over the past decade. Social media influencers today are not merely content creators; they are opinion-shapers, informal advisors and in many cases, decision architects influencing millions of individuals in real time. From financial investments to medical advice, from legal awareness to lifestyle choices, influencers have entered domains traditionally reserved for certified professionals.
India represents one of the most powerful and fastest-growing hubs of this transformation. According to industry and market research estimates, India has crossed over 800 million internet users and nearly 450–500 million active social media users, making it one of the largest digital consumption markets globally (Reuters, 2026; DataReportal, 2025). Indian users spend an average of 2.5 to 3 hours daily on social media platforms, reflecting the deep integration of digital platforms into everyday decision-making (DataReportal, 2025).
The scale of India’s influencer ecosystem is equally significant. Recent industry reports suggest that India has an estimated 3.5 to 4.5 million influencers across platforms, spanning nano, micro and celebrity categories (Kofluence, 2025). Parallelly, the influencer marketing industry has witnessed rapid expansion, reaching approximately ₹3,500–3,600 crore in 2024, with a projected compound annual growth rate of around 25 percent, positioning it among the fastest-growing segments of the digital economy (India Brand Equity Foundation, 2025; Kantar & The Goat Agency, 2025).
More importantly, this growth is behavioural in nature. Studies indicate that over 65 percent of Indian consumers rely on influencer recommendations for product discovery, lifestyle choices and even knowledge-based decisions (Kantar & The Goat Agency, 2025). Additionally, nearly 70 percent of brands in India now incorporate influencer marketing as a core component of their outreach strategy, demonstrating the institutionalization of digital influence in economic and social systems (India Brand Equity Foundation, 2025).
However, this democratization of voice has created a dangerous paradox, while access to information has expanded, the authenticity and accountability of that information have sharply declined. The absence of regulatory frameworks has allowed unqualified individuals to provide high-risk advice in critical sectors such as finance, health and law, often leading to misinformation, financial losses and even public health risks.
Recognizing this challenge, several countries have begun tightening regulations. Among them, China has taken the most decisive and structural approach, offering important lessons for India.
China’s Regulatory Model: From Influence to Accountability
China’s regulatory intervention in the influencer ecosystem represents one of the most stringent and structured global models. The country has moved beyond reactive moderation to a pre-emptive regulatory framework, recognizing early that unchecked digital influence can pose systemic risks to financial stability, public health and social order. This approach reflects a shift from platform-driven self-regulation to state-enforced accountability across the digital ecosystem.
1. Mandatory Credential Verification
A central pillar of China’s framework is the requirement that influencers possess verified professional qualifications before creating content in sensitive domains such as finance, medicine, law and education. As per regulatory directives issued by the Cyberspace Administration of China, influencers are required to submit their academic degrees, professional licenses, or relevant certifications to social media platforms for verification.
This requirement effectively restricts unqualified individuals from disseminating advisory content in high-risk sectors. Influencers without verified credentials are prohibited from offering guidance or interpretations in these areas, thereby institutionalizing a “no degree, no advice” principle. The policy transforms influencer activity in critical domains into a semi-regulated professional function, aligning digital influence with formal expertise and accountability standards.
2. Platform Accountability
China’s regulatory model extends beyond individual influencers to impose significant responsibilities on digital platforms. Major platforms such as Douyin and Weibo are mandated to act as compliance intermediaries within the ecosystem.
These platforms are required to verify influencer credentials before allowing content publication in regulated domains, continuously monitor content for authenticity and accuracy and ensure clear disclosure of sources as well as sponsored or promotional material. This creates a shared liability model, where platforms are no longer passive hosts but active gatekeepers responsible for preventing misinformation and regulatory violations. The approach significantly strengthens enforcement by embedding compliance mechanisms directly into the digital infrastructure.
3. Crackdown on Misleading and Harmful Content
China has also undertaken aggressive enforcement measures against misleading and harmful content, particularly in high-risk sectors. Regulatory authorities have targeted financial misinformation, including unverified investment advice and speculative trading tips, as well as fake medical guidance and unscientific health claims. Additionally, strict action has been taken against the promotion of illegal or highly restricted financial instruments, including cryptocurrency-related activities.
A key initiative in this regard is the “Qinglang” (Clean and Bright) campaign led by the Cyberspace Administration of China, which has resulted in the removal of thousands of misleading posts and the suspension of numerous influencer accounts. This campaign reflects a proactive governance model focused on maintaining informational integrity and reducing systemic digital risks.
4. Structural Controls and Identity Regulations
Beyond content regulation, China has introduced deeper structural controls to enhance traceability and accountability within the influencer ecosystem. These include the implementation of “one account, one identity” rules, which mandate that each content creator be linked to a verified real-world identity.
Additionally, mandatory authentication mechanisms have been introduced to ensure that only verified individuals can operate influential accounts. Monetization activities, including advertising and brand collaborations, are also subject to regulatory oversight, with restrictions imposed on unverified or non-compliant creators.
These structural reforms aim to eliminate anonymity-driven misinformation and establish a transparent, accountable digital environment where influence is directly tied to verified identity and regulatory compliance.
Global Context: A Growing Regulatory Consensus
1. United States: In the United States, regulatory oversight of influencers is primarily led by the Federal Trade Commission, which has significantly strengthened its guidelines in recent years. These regulations focus on ensuring clear disclosure of paid partnerships, making it mandatory for influencers to transparently identify sponsored content to prevent deceptive advertising practices.
Additionally, the framework establishes liability for misleading or unsubstantiated claims, particularly in sectors such as health, wellness and finance, where misinformation can directly impact consumer well-being. Influencers and brands can be held accountable for promoting products or advice that lack scientific or factual backing. The FTC has also increasingly targeted health and financial misinformation, recognizing the growing tendency of influencers to operate as informal advisors.
However, despite these measures, the US model remains largely reactive in nature, with enforcement typically occurring after violations are identified or harm has already taken place, rather than through pre-emptive verification or licensing mechanisms.
2. European Union: The European Union has adopted a more systemic and forward-looking regulatory approach through frameworks such as the Digital Services Act. This legislation emphasizes transparency in digital advertising, requiring platforms and influencers to clearly disclose commercial intent and sponsored content.
A key pillar of the EU model is algorithmic accountability, where platforms are required to provide greater transparency regarding how content is recommended and amplified, particularly when it influences public opinion or consumer behavior. Additionally, the framework enforces platform responsibility, holding digital intermediaries accountable for moderating harmful or misleading content and ensuring compliance with regulatory standards.
This approach reflects a shift towards co-regulation, where both platforms and creators share responsibility for maintaining a safe and transparent digital ecosystem.
3. Emerging Global Insight: Beyond specific regulatory frameworks, global research highlights a deeper structural shift in the role of influencers within society. Studies indicate that nearly half of digital users rely on influencers for news, opinions and decision-making, often placing them on par with or even above traditional media sources in terms of trust and accessibility.
This transformation has elevated influencers from mere entertainers to quasi-institutional actors, functioning as informal advisors in areas ranging from finance and health to public policy and social awareness. As a result, the absence of formal accountability mechanisms creates systemic risks, reinforcing the need for structured regulatory oversight across jurisdictions.
The Indian Context: A Regulatory Vacuum with High Stakes
India is among the world’s largest and fastest-growing digital markets, with over 800 million internet users and a rapidly expanding social media ecosystem. The influencer economy has grown in parallel, with the industry estimated at approximately ₹2,800–3,000 crore, reflecting its increasing role in shaping consumer behaviour, public opinion and even knowledge dissemination. This growth is further amplified by India’s young demographic profile, where a significant proportion of users are active digital consumers, relying heavily on social media platforms for information, guidance and decision-making.
Despite this scale and influence, India’s regulatory framework governing influencers remains fragmented and underdeveloped, lacking a comprehensive structure to address the risks associated with high-impact digital content.
Existing Measures
India has introduced certain partial regulatory mechanisms to address specific aspects of influencer activity. The Advertising Standards Council of India has issued guidelines mandating disclosure of paid partnerships and sponsored content to ensure transparency in digital advertising. Similarly, the Securities and Exchange Board of India has imposed restrictions on unregistered individuals offering investment advice, aiming to curb financial misinformation in digital spaces.
However, these measures remain limited in scope and effectiveness. Their enforcement mechanisms are relatively weak, they operate in sector-specific silos rather than as part of an integrated regulatory framework and most importantly, they are largely reactive in nature, intervening only after violations occur rather than preventing them proactively.
The Core Problem: High-Risk Advisory Without Accountability
The most critical gap in India’s influencer ecosystem lies in the rise of high-risk advisory content without corresponding accountability mechanisms. In domains where misinformation can have serious or irreversible consequences, unregulated digital advice is creating systemic vulnerabilities.
1. Financial & Investment Advice
In the financial domain, unqualified influencers frequently promote intraday trading strategies, speculative cryptocurrency schemes and so-called “guaranteed return” products without possessing the necessary regulatory approvals or professional expertise. Such content often attracts retail investors seeking quick financial gains, leading to significant monetary losses and increased exposure to financial fraud. Over time, this trend can contribute to broader systemic risks within the financial ecosystem, undermining investor confidence and market stability.
2. Health & Medical Advice
In the health sector, influencers routinely share unverified diet plans, alternative medicine claims and mental health advice without clinical training or scientific validation. While such content may appear accessible and relatable, it often lacks medical credibility and can mislead audiences into adopting unsafe practices. The consequences include public health risks, self-medication and delays in seeking professional medical treatment, which can exacerbate health conditions and strain healthcare systems.
3. Legal & Policy Interpretation
In the legal and policy domain, non-experts increasingly provide simplified but often misleading interpretations of laws, regulations and compliance requirements. Such content can create confusion among citizens and businesses, leading to unintentional legal violations, regulatory non-compliance and the spread of misinformation regarding rights and obligations.
Collectively, these challenges highlight a critical structural issue: influencers are functioning as informal advisors in high-stakes domains without being subject to the accountability standards that govern formal professionals. This disconnects between influence and responsibility underscores the urgent need for a comprehensive regulatory framework in India.
Why India Needs a Structured Influencer Regulation Framework
India’s regulatory response must be balanced, democratic and evidence-based, ensuring public protection without drifting into excessive censorship. The objective is not to restrict digital expression but to introduce accountability in high-risk domains where misinformation can have serious consequences.
1. Protecting Citizens from Harm
The foremost priority of any regulatory framework should be risk mitigation, particularly in sectors where misinformation can directly affect individual well-being and economic stability. In financial markets, unverified advice can lead to significant monetary losses and distort investor behaviour. In healthcare systems, misleading information can endanger lives and delay professional treatment. Similarly, in the domain of legal compliance, inaccurate guidance can result in violations and unintended legal consequences. A structured framework is therefore essential to safeguard citizens from these risks.
2. Formalizing the Creator Economy
Regulation can play a transformative role in formalizing and strengthening the influencer ecosystem. By introducing standards and accountability, it can enhance trust in influencer content, making audiences more confident in the reliability of digital advice. It can also professionalize the ecosystem, distinguishing credible experts from unqualified voices. Over time, such a structured environment can attract institutional investments, enabling sustainable growth of the creator economy as a recognized economic sector.
3. Strengthening Digital Governance
Influencer regulation is closely aligned with India’s broader governance priorities. It complements initiatives such as Digital India by promoting a responsible and secure digital ecosystem. It also supports the agenda of responsible AI and data governance, ensuring that digital platforms operate with transparency and accountability. Furthermore, it strengthens consumer protection frameworks by addressing misinformation and deceptive practices in online spaces.
Proposed Regulatory Framework for India
A forward-looking Indian model must integrate global best practices while preserving democratic freedoms and encouraging innovation.
1. Tiered Classification of Influencer Content: A foundational step should be the classification of influencer content based on risk levels. Content related to lifestyle and entertainment can be categorized as low-risk, requiring minimal regulatory oversight. Educational and general awareness content may fall under moderate risk, where some level of accountability is necessary. However, domains such as finance, health and law should be classified as high-risk, warranting strict regulatory controls due to their potential impact on individuals and society.
2. Mandatory Certification for High-Risk Domains: In high-risk sectors, it should be mandatory that only certified professionals provide advisory content. Financial advice must be restricted to individuals registered with the Securities and Exchange Board of India, ensuring compliance with investment advisory norms. Health-related content should be limited to registered medical practitioners, while legal interpretations must be provided only by licensed advocates. This approach ensures that expertise, rather than popularity, determines credibility in sensitive domains.
3. Platform-Level Compliance: Social media platforms must be integrated into the regulatory framework as active stakeholders. They should be required to verify the credentials of creators operating in high-risk domains, ensuring that only qualified individuals can disseminate advisory content. Platforms must also develop mechanisms to flag unverified or potentially misleading content and establish systems that enable traceability and accountability, thereby reducing anonymity-driven misinformation.
4. Disclosure and Transparency: Transparency should be a non-negotiable element of the framework. Influencers must be required to provide clear source citations for claims, disclose all sponsored or paid content and include appropriate risk disclaimers, especially in financial, medical and legal contexts. Such measures will empower audiences to make informed decisions and reduce the impact of deceptive practices.
5. Penalty Framework: A robust enforcement mechanism is essential to ensure compliance. This should include monetary penalties for misinformation, temporary or permanent suspension of accounts for repeated violations and legal liability in cases where misinformation leads to significant harm. A clear penalty structure will act as a deterrent against irresponsible content creation.
6. Digital Literacy Campaigns: Regulation alone cannot address the challenge of misinformation. The government must simultaneously invest in digital literacy initiatives aimed at educating users about identifying misinformation, evaluating sources and adopting critical thinking. Encouraging a culture of verification will strengthen societal resilience against misleading content and complement regulatory efforts.
Balancing Regulation and Freedom
Critics often argue that stricter regulations may restrict free speech and limit diversity of opinions. However, the objective of influencer regulation is not censorship but the promotion of responsible speech in high-risk domains.
There is a clear distinction between opinion and professional advice. While opinions must remain free and protected in a democratic society, professional advice in areas such as finance, health and law must be subject to regulatory standards. Recognizing this distinction is critical to designing a framework that protects both freedom of expression and public interest.
Strategic Way Forward for India
India must carefully navigate between two extremes. On one hand, total deregulation can lead to misinformation-driven chaos, eroding trust in digital platforms. On the other hand, excessive control can stifle innovation and restrict creative expression.
The optimal path lies in adopting a “regulated freedom model”, where creativity and content diversity remain unrestricted, but expertise-based advisory content is subject to clear regulatory standards. In this model, platforms act as responsible intermediaries, ensuring compliance while enabling innovation. Such a balanced approach can position India as a global leader in digital governance.
The influencer economy is no longer a peripheral phenomenon; it has become a central pillar of the digital knowledge ecosystem. China’s regulatory experiment, despite its authoritarian overtones, underscores a fundamental reality: unregulated influence in high-risk domains is unsustainable.
For India, the challenge is to transition from a system of unchecked digital influence to one of structured accountability, where reach is aligned with responsibility and popularity is balanced with credibility. In doing so, India can not only protect its citizens but also strengthen the foundations of its emerging digital economy.