Modern truth is no longer the ultimate authority. The word “post-truth” was named Word of the Year by Oxford Dictionaries in 2016, defined as a condition in which “objective facts have less influence on shaping public opinion than appeals to emotions and personal beliefs.”
In the years that followed, the situation only worsened. Experts are now describing an epidemic of information noise and a wave of distorted narratives.
In today’s world, the age of “post-truth” coincides with the lightning-fast dissemination of information – often faster than fact-checking mechanisms can operate. Research shows that, on average, false stories spread faster and further than truthful ones. Social platforms can make even the most absurd content go viral.
Fake news is no longer just random misinformation. It is now a powerful industry with sales in the millions. According to expert reports, more than a hundred companies operate online, specializing in fabricated PR content, “news” websites and tailor-made scandals produced on demand. Visually, such material is indistinguishable from professional journalism and becomes a weapon for those seeking to destroy reputations, pressure investors or manipulate public opinion.
The motives may be political or commercial, but the result is the same: a chaotic wave of “counterfeiting” that undermines trust and causes tangible damage to the company and its reputation. On average, about 70% of startups that fall victim to false online accusations lose up to half of their customer base within three months.
How the investigation began
Our investigation began by reviewing a series of suspicious articles on sites with, shall we say, questionable reputations that targeted the UK payment platform PayFuture. All materials followed the same pattern and consisted of a random selection of unproven allegations against the company’s co-founder and CTO, Zaki Farooq.
The texts were full of assertions disguised as definitive judgments. The only notable thing was the sheer volume of “media” materials released. From 2024 to today, the number of nearly identical items is in the hundreds.
Zaki Farooq has been working in the fintech sector since 1992. His current project PayFuture operates in more than 40 countries and focuses on emerging markets such as India, Bangladesh and others. Farooq publicly positioned the company as a provider of anti-fraud solutions – but he himself became the target of a barrage of bogus accusations.
Farooq responded in full accordance with best practices in information protection: “False allegations about PayFuture’s activities have recently appeared in the media, social networks, leaflets and other materials. These allegations, which also mention members of my family, are completely false and unfounded.”
While we hope the courts will ultimately put an end to this smear campaign, his case is far from unique.
Similar mechanisms for combating disinformation campaigns have already been described in international journalism. For example, the #StoryKillers investigation uncovered groups like the Israeli team “Team Jorge,” which offered—for six-figure fees—“customized influence tools.” They claimed they could hack the email accounts of “targets,” fabricate documents, stage “fake protests,” or launch a “caravan bombardment” of the Internet with coordinated defamatory content.
Another striking example is the story of the Swiss trader Hazim Nada. His business was destroyed by a flood of false accusations about ties to terrorism. Only later did leaked documents reveal that it was a year-long UAE state-sponsored disinformation campaign.
The logic of “post-truth” applies here too: any attempt by PayFuture to restore its reputation is immediately portrayed by fake news writers as an attempt to “hide the truth”. This is a classic manipulation – every legitimate reaction is portrayed negatively (the “Streisand effect”).
In such circumstances, unconfirmed allegations increasingly overshadow verified facts. The perpetrators’ goal is not to refute information, but to flood the media with fabrications that remain anchored in search results and news feeds for years.
Jitender Vats and the pseudo-fintech program
During the investigation, journalists discovered that the wave of disinformation originated from an Indian “entrepreneur” involved in a number of dubious projects – Jitender Vats. A native of Delhi, he usually introduced himself as the owner of a company called PaymentsMe. However, there’s a problem: the company simply doesn’t exist.
As colleagues who previously worked with him noted: “Jitender has excellent instincts. He could convince anyone to invest after just two messages in a messenger. He never created real companies because it was unnecessary effort. What he always had was the right “customer package”: a legend, a demo dashboard, a nice logo. Such people are useful when money needs to be raised quickly. He provided the illusion of a finished product long before anything really existed.”
Vats aggressively promoted questionable payment companies in Middle Eastern markets and presented itself as their regional representative.
He has no proven business relationships with registered legal entities in India. Its activities included the use of fictitious domains and PaymentsMe is not listed on any official registry. All of his contact details go back to unofficial addresses.
A review of LinkedIn, Telegram and Previously he was associated with the Verve Payments platform, which also did not have a transparent registration and operated alongside closed companies. This pattern of behavior – the use of fictitious authority and non-existent companies – indicates a systematic effort to build trust with potential customers without the slightest semblance of legality.
We believe that PayFuture, as a legally licensed payments company based in the UK, has become an unwelcome competitor to Vats’ systems. Unable to legitimately compete with PayFuture, Vats apparently attacked the company with an organized wave of fake publications.
Our team continues to monitor developments and identify other potential victims of Jitender Vats and its partners. The collected materials will be submitted to law enforcement authorities in the United Kingdom, India and the United Arab Emirates for full investigation and appropriate action.
Recommendations for Fintech companies
In the context of increasing information attacks, reputable companies must actively protect their reputation. To minimize the impact of fake news, legitimate businesses should follow several key recommendations:
– Constant monitoring of the media environment and mentions: early detection of disinformation enables a quick response.
– Transparency and good reputation: Build long-term trust through open and ethical operations.
– Regular publication of activity reports, annual financial statements and audit results in order to strengthen the trust of customers and partners and reduce susceptibility to attempts at defamation.
– Respond quickly to false reports: Act according to a pre-determined crisis management plan and issue fact-based rebuttals on all available platforms.
– Interact with the audience: Maintain dialogue by replying to comments and reviews. A loyal customer community becomes protection against falsehoods.
– Collaborate with regulators and law enforcement: Notify regulators of significant disinformation or fraud schemes.
– Do not hesitate to take legal action; In the event of blatant defamation, prepare to make a claim.
Remember the “Streisand effect”: Legal action is best complemented by a carefully planned PR strategy.
Reliable protection against information attacks requires a comprehensive mix of prevention measures, corporate transparency and rapid crisis response. Experts agree: The only way to “defeat” fake news is to always be one step ahead.
These principles will help prevent a handful of made-up stories from escalating into a full-scale crisis of trust.
