Madhubani Medical College Denounces Viral Ramadan Circular as Malicious Hoax
Madhubani Medical College has debunked a viral, fabricated circular claiming it would enforce "forced marriages" for students during Ramadan. The hoax, which was amplified by regional news channels, has been labeled as photoshopped by the institution. The incident highlights the dangers of digital misinformation and the politicization of unverified content.
The misinformation gained significant traction after being amplified by several Hindi news outlets, including News18 Bihar, which aired segments on the purported new rules. This media coverage triggered a firestorm of online criticism, with various quarters calling for the National Medical Commission (NMC) to revoke the private facility's recognition or shut it down entirely. Given that the college is owned by Dr. Faiyaz Ahmad, a Member of Parliament from the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), the incident was quickly politicized, with critics attempting to link the fabricated "moral policing" to the broader political ideology of the institution’s leadership.
In a swift response to the escalating crisis, the administration of Madhubani Medical College released a formal statement via its official Facebook and Instagram channels. The college management clarified that no such circular had ever been drafted or authorized, characterizing the viral image as a crudely photoshopped hoax. Officials pointed out that this is not the first time the institution has been targeted by digital misinformation during religious festivals, noting a pattern of similar deceptive campaigns in previous years aimed at tarnishing the college's academic reputation and social standing.
The fallout from this incident highlights the increasingly precarious intersection of digital disinformation and mainstream journalism. While the college has moved to clear its name, the rapid spread of the hoax underscores the systemic dangers of unverified content being legitimized by televised media before a thorough fact-check is conducted. As the institution explores potential legal avenues against the originators of the fake notice, the incident serves as a stark warning to the public and media houses alike regarding the critical necessity of rigorous verification in an era of hyper-connected, and often polarized, information flows.

Comment List