Last week, that clip came from Jaipur.

Within four hours of the incident occurring, the average smartphone user in Delhi, Mumbai, or Bengaluru had seen the video—not because they searched for it, but because WhatsApp forwards, Telegram channels, and X (Twitter) algorithms decided they needed to see it.

Until we decide that being informed is more important than being first , the next Jaipur is already loading on a server near you. And this time, the victim might be innocent. If you or someone you know is affected by the circulation of disturbing content, please reach out to local mental health support services. Do not suffer in silence.

Mainstream news channels (TV and digital) initially refused to show the graphic visuals. They used blurred stills and pixelated mosaics. They followed the Information Technology Rules, 2021, which discourage the display of disturbing content without context.

But it didn’t matter. The audience had already seen the raw, unedited version on Telegram, WhatsApp, or a low-moderated subreddit.

But witnessing without action is just consumption. And when we share the video to "spread awareness," we are often just spreading trauma. For every one person who shares a clip to alert the police, ten share it because they want to be the first in their group chat to have seen the worst thing. The Jaipur incident highlighted a major shift: the death of the gatekeeper.

It is not just morbid curiosity. It is a distorted form of civic duty. We tell ourselves we need to see it to understand how bad the world is. We tell ourselves we are bearing witness.

We have moved from a "Push" model (News channels push information to you) to a "Leak" model (Raw content leaks, and news channels try to catch up). The Jaipur video wasn't broken by a journalist; it was broken by a random bystander with a phone and a high-speed internet connection. By day two, the discussion had shifted from "What happened?" to "What should we do to them?"