Generating key takeaways...
The Indian government refutes claims of a formal collaboration with AI-generated band Trilok, as tensions rise over the use of artificial intelligence in public media and the lack of clear regulations for AI content.
The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has told Parliament that Prasar Bharati has not entered into any partnership with Trilok, an AI-generated music band, after questions were raised in the Rajya Sabha and public debate intensified over the use of artificial intelligence by a state-funded broadcaster. The written reply, tabled on Friday, was delivered by Minister of State for Information & Broadcasting Dr. L. Murugan and sought to dispel reports of a formal collaboration for airing content on Akashvani, Doordarshan or the WAVES OTT platform. [1][4]
According to the original report, Trilok was launched by Collective Media Network as a digital music act created entirely with AI: vocals, lyrics, visuals and stage personas were generated by algorithms and there are no human performers behind the project. The ministry’s reply acknowledged this description but drew a clear distinction between Trilok’s commercial partnerships and any official relationship with the public broadcaster. [1][5]
The ministry did confirm, however, that AI-generated devotional music was broadcast during the Durga Navratri festival as part of a limited pilot exercise. Dr. Murugan emphasised that the trial incurred no expenditures, budget allocations or recurring commitments, framing the broadcast as an isolated experiment rather than the start of an AI-led programming shift. [1][4]
Industry reactions outlined in the lead report and subsequent coverage underline why the matter attracted parliamentary attention. Music industry bodies and musician unions warned that introducing AI-generated content on a taxpayer-funded platform without prior disclosure risked displacing human performers, depressing remuneration and creating unfair competition for creators and rights holders. Copyright experts also flagged the legal risks where AI systems are trained on unlicensed datasets. [1]
Separate accounts have presented a different interpretation of Trilok’s relationship with mainstream broadcasters. Some industry commentary characterised the AI band’s appearances and platform partnerships as signalling institutional acceptance of AI music within formal broadcast frameworks, suggesting the moment could normalise AI-generated compositions in India’s media ecosystem. The contrast between that perception and the ministry’s categorical denial of a formal Prasar Bharati partnership highlights the current ambiguity around how AI content is classified and disseminated. [3][6]
Beyond the immediate dispute, stakeholders and lawmakers have pressed for clearer policy. Members of Parliament asked the government to outline disclosure standards for AI-assisted programming, mechanisms to prevent copyright infringement and frameworks to protect performers’ rights , including safeguards against non-consensual voice cloning. Observers say forthcoming guidelines will need to balance innovation with protections for livelihoods, rights enforcement and cultural stewardship. [1]
Trilok’s creators have pursued commercial collaborations, including platform and production partnerships that support distribution and technical development; Collective Media Network has positioned the project as part of a broader move by music-tech firms to blend traditional motifs with contemporary forms, while allies in the AI-music space have linked the band to third-party tools and platforms that enable production and global reach. Those commercial ties help explain why some industry reporting interpreted Trilok’s visibility as more than an isolated experiment. The government, however, maintains there is no partnership with Prasar Bharati and no public funds directed to such collaborations. [5][6][3]
As the debate continues, the ministry’s written clarification may calm immediate concerns about state-funded endorsement of Trilok, but it has not resolved wider questions about transparency, licensing and the role of generative AI in public broadcasting. Industry watchers expect the government to publish detailed guidelines that clarify how public broadcasters should treat AI-generated content and protect established creative sectors as generative technologies become more pervasive in newsrooms, music production and entertainment. [1][4][3]
📌 Reference Map:
##Reference Map:
- [1] (Storyboard18) – Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 4, Paragraph 6, Paragraph 8
- [4] (Exchange4media) – Paragraph 1, Paragraph 3, Paragraph 8
- [3] (LiveMint) – Paragraph 5, Paragraph 7, Paragraph 8
- [5] (BuzzinContent) – Paragraph 2, Paragraph 7
- [6] (MediaInfoline) – Paragraph 5, Paragraph 7
Source: Noah Wire Services
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative is recent, published on December 12, 2025. The earliest known publication date of a substantially similar content is October 3, 2025, when Prasar Bharati announced a partnership with Trilok. This indicates that the current report is addressing a recent development, enhancing its freshness score. The report includes updated data and quotes, suggesting it is not recycled content. However, the presence of multiple references to earlier reports may indicate some recycled material. The narrative is based on a press release, which typically warrants a high freshness score. No discrepancies in figures, dates, or quotes were identified. The report does not include updated data but recycles older material, which may justify a higher freshness score but should still be flagged.
Quotes check
Score:
9
Notes:
The direct quotes from Minister of State for Information & Broadcasting Dr. L. Murugan are unique to this report, with no identical matches found in earlier material. This suggests potentially original or exclusive content. No variations in quote wording were noted.
Source reliability
Score:
7
Notes:
The narrative originates from Storyboard18, a media outlet that appears to be obscure and unverifiable, lacking a substantial online presence. This raises concerns about the reliability of the source. The report references multiple reputable organizations, including the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and Collective Media Network, which adds credibility.
Plausability check
Score:
8
Notes:
The claims made in the narrative are plausible and align with known developments in the media industry. The report provides specific factual anchors, including names, institutions, and dates, enhancing its credibility. The language and tone are consistent with typical corporate and official communications. No excessive or off-topic details unrelated to the claim are present. The tone is appropriately formal and resembles typical corporate or official language.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): OPEN
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM
Summary:
The narrative presents a recent development regarding Prasar Bharati’s relationship with the AI band Trilok. While the content is timely and includes unique quotes, the source’s reliability is questionable due to its obscure nature. The plausibility of the claims is supported by specific factual anchors and consistent language. Given the source’s reliability concerns, further verification from more reputable outlets is recommended to confirm the accuracy of the information.
