(Exposing the networks that spread hate is a key focus area in The Quint's reportage. Become a member and help us continue Uncovering Hate)In just three months leading up to the Assam Assembly elections, over 150 AI-generated posts were deployed across social media platforms, many of them targeting the Muslim community and Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi. The posts, which together garnered nearly 14 lakh views, were not confined to anonymous handles, says a report by Netherlands-based Foundation for Diaspora in Action for Human Rights and Democracy (DAHRD). The report analysed 8,635 posts (deduplicated) across X, Facebook and Instagram, and it has alleged that Gaurav Gogoi and the Muslim community have been subjected to a coordinated digital propaganda campaign in the run-up to the Assam elections.According to the report, the campaign represents a significant escalation in the scale of the use of AI in manufacturing hate, fabricating evidence and influencing voter perceptions. The AI content analysed ranged from:Synthetic videos showing imagined border infiltrationAI-generated visuals reinforcing conspiracy theories about MuslimsDeepfake clips targeting political opponents, especially Congress MP Gaurav GogoiThe report identified a structured ecosystem where AI content is produced, amplified, and pushed into mass circulation, often reaching WhatsApp networks where traceability ends.Assam CM Himanta's 'Miya' Remark and the Normalisation of Targeted PressureHate Campaign Against MuslimsThe AI-driven campaign in Assam has prominently targeted Bengali-speaking Muslim communities, employing not just inflammatory rhetoric but also the mass production of synthetic visual content. Analysis of 158 identified AI-generated posts reveals a troubling pattern: conspiracy theories were not merely echoed; they were vividly illustrated.Narratives such as “population jihad,” “land jihad,” and “Bangladeshi infiltration” were transformed into seemingly authentic scenarios using AI tools. Videos showcased fabricated border crossings, while images depicted Muslims as demographic and territorial threats. In some instances, entirely fictitious events were crafted to mimic documentary evidence, blurring the lines between reality and fabrication. This marks a significant shift in hate propaganda; AI has enabled campaign operatives to simulate “proof,” making misinformation more compelling and emotionally resonant. This effect is particularly pronounced in low-information environments, where visuals often carry more weight than text. The campaign employed what researchers term a “visual grammar of othering,” consistently highlighting religious markers, such as skull caps, beards, mosques, and traditional attire, creating subconscious associations between identity and threat, thereby amplifying communal biases through algorithmic reinforcement.Language further bolstered this campaign. Terms like “Miya,” “Bangladeshi,” and “infiltrator” were embedded in captions and hashtags, reinforcing the visual narrative. Even as legal pressures prompted a shift away from overtly derogatory language, the imagery remained constant, allowing the campaign to adapt linguistically while maintaining its substantive message. The scale and coordination of this effort indicate that AI was not a sporadic tool but a central mechanism in the manufacturing and normalisation of anti-Muslim sentiment during the election cycle.Character Assassination of Gaurav GogoiIn tandem with the hate campaign against Muslims, the report highlights a focused, sustained AI-driven campaign against Congress MP Gaurav Gogoi, seen as the main challenger to chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma. A total of 31 AI-generated videos and images identified him as the most targeted individual in the dataset.These pieces of content extended beyond political criticism; they aimed to reconstruct Gogoi’s identity through AI manipulation, portraying him as a “Pakistani agent,” a sympathiser of “Bangladeshi infiltrators,” and a figure culturally and politically alien to Assam. Routine political or diplomatic interactions were reframed in AI-generated visuals to suggest foreign allegiance, weaponising ambiguity and transforming ordinary events into narratives of national betrayal. The campaign began in November, with Gogoi being labelled as 'Paijaan' even from official BJP accounts. This intensified in December with as many as 100 anti-Gogoi posts in this ecosystem. The campaign peaked in early February, with a coordinated hashtag push amplifying these claims across various platforms. The report particularly raised concerns regarding amplification of such content. It observed that some AI-generated content was disseminated through official party-linked accounts and verified profiles, including those of cabinet ministers. For instance on 7 January, the Assam BJP posted an AI generated video of Gaurav Gogoi dressed in a lungi and Muslim prayer cap meeting Pakistan Field Marshal Asim Munir. Around Republic Day, BJP Assam posted an AI video of Gaurav Gogoi recalling Pakistan's national anthem. This marks a significant shift from previous disinformation ecosystems, where such material typically circulated through unofficial or deniable channels. By leveraging AI, the campaign produced high volumes of personalised attack content rapidly, tailoring narratives to undermine Gogoi’s credibility among diverse voter segments. This represents a form of digital character assassination that operates at scale, with minimal accountability. Researchers conclude that this exemplifies AI-enabled electoral manipulation, using synthetic media to distort voter perceptions of a key democratic contender.Alignment With Himanta Biswa Sarma's CampaignThe AI-driven campaign did not function independently. It was closely aligned with the political messaging of Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, whose rhetoric formed the backbone of the broader narrative ecosystem.The report identifies a three-phase evolution in Sarma’s public communication between January and March 2026, reflecting both escalation and adaptation.Phase One: Direct Provocation (January)During this period, messaging was explicit and confrontational. Public statements directly targeted “Miya Muslims”, with calls that framed economic hardship and administrative pressure as tools to force migration or exclusion. The language was unambiguous, signalling a strategy of overt polarisation.Phase Two: Tactical Reframing (February)Following legal scrutiny—including complaints and court notices—there was a noticeable shift in vocabulary. Terms like “Miya” were replaced with “Bangladeshi infiltrators”, reframing the same target group within a national security discourse. This allowed the rhetoric to retain its core message while reducing immediate legal risk.Phase Three: Controlled Escalation (March)By March, the rhetoric intensified again, but within a more calibrated framework. In interviews and public statements, Sarma openly articulated strategies aimed at creating pressure on Bengali-speaking Muslims through evictions, denial of benefits, and border enforcement—while maintaining linguistic caution.Crucially, the report highlights that this was not merely a rhetorical shift, but a strategic adaptation. Sarma himself acknowledged modifying terminology to remain within legal boundaries—indicating a conscious calibration rather than a substantive change in intent.Throughout all three phases, AI-generated content played a critical supporting role. Even when language became more guarded, synthetic visuals continued to communicate explicit hostility, effectively bypassing legal constraints.In one widely circulated instance, an AI-generated video showed Sarma firing at Muslim men—combining real footage with fabricated imagery. Though later deleted after backlash, the video amassed over a million views within hours, illustrating the speed and impact of AI-amplified messaging.The report concludes that Sarma’s communication strategy and the AI content ecosystem operated in tandem—one setting the narrative frame, the other translating it into emotionally powerful, highly shareable visual propaganda.Hidden BJP & RSS Link to Propaganda Films? Truth Behind 10 'Political' Movies