Of beauties and beasts: The digital dilemma

Beauty may lie in the eye of the beholder, but an industry once projected to be valued at USD500 billion by 2027 offers a different view. The creator economy is a strange beast, a unique mix of trust and transparency coupled with a constant flow of information promoting different beauty products and standards.

Yet, capitalising on the attention economy is more lucrative than frivolous. With shrinking attention spans, shifting goalposts of beauty, and millions of dollars worth of brand deals on the line, there is significant economic incentive for being ahead of the latest trends.

With a little help from GLP-1 medications, affordable botox and fillers, and editing tools, achieving these unrealistic standards has never been more accessible. But with improvements in technology, especially AI-powered editing tools, not everyone with access to these resources uses their power for good.

The slew of Indian celebrities approaching court to seek protection from unauthorised use of their likenesses in undesirable ways is one example, proving that the online world is an increasingly scary place.

MEITY rules broaden AI labels

In this vein, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MEITY) made amendments to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, in February 2026, to include digitally manipulated content.

Under the new rules, “synthetically generated information” includes visual or audiovisual information that is artificially created, generated, modified or altered in a way that appears to be real, and depicts an individual in a manner that is, or is likely to be perceived as, real.

All such information is now subject to the rules and new labelling requirements that require synthetically generated information to be identified as such, including permanently embedded metadata and information to help ascertain the originating computer.

Answers to frequently asked questions released by the MEITY reveal a key reason for these changes to be the rise in AI and machine learning technologies. However, the definition of synthetically generated information sweeps into its ambit a lot more information than seemingly intended. This could be a problem, especially for the creator industry.

The use of editing tools like Photoshop for pictures and ads is nothing new. A simple search on any app store reveals several similar tools that allow anyone to “improve” their appearance with a few keystrokes. From removing background objects and digitally adding makeup to physically slimming down a body, enhancing an image has never been easier.

What is different is the market these apps cater to. Facetune, for instance, is promoted as the “go-to choice for influencers, creators, or anyone who wants to keep their content on Instagram or any social platform fresh and interesting”, allowing you to “show up online exactly how you want to be seen”. In its own words, striving to create an inherent contradiction between our online and in-person selves.

The wide net that the rules cast on digitally altered content could affect countless creators.

As a bit of respite, they do provide exceptions for some information that will not be considered synthetically generated. This includes information created or altered by routine or good-faith editing, and colour adjustments that do not materially alter, distort or misrepresent the substance, context or meaning of the underlying information.

However, assessing whether a piece of content falls within this exception can only be judged on a case-by-case basis, both by the form and substance of the content, and the edits. For instance, it would be hard to argue that a fitness influencer altering the way his/her body appears to promote a protein powder is editing the content in good faith, or that it does not misrepresent its context.

Authenticity threatened by AI rules

In an industry that thrives on authenticity and trust – with communities engaging with creators seen as more “real” – perceived falsity could be a death knell. Rules that set out to protect people from real harm that AI-generated content might have are also creating ripples of unintended consequences in an entirely unrelated segment.

As one creator put it: “If [using these editing tools is] done properly, it should be hard to tell you’ve used it.” However, once these editing tools begin to embed alteration signifiers, perhaps restraint will become key.

Ashima Obhan is a senior partner and Shuchi Dutta is a senior associate at Obhan Mason