Skip to main content

PeakMetrics / Fact Checks

Culture & entertainment fact checks

Explore claims publishers have checked about culture & entertainment. Read their original ratings and follow the evidence.

3,169 published reviews in this topic

FACTLYCulture & entertainment

Video of Holi celebrations at Atul tunnel in Srinagar

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim concerns a video presented as showing Holi celebrations at the Atal tunnel in Srinagar. The review identifies the building and fireworks shown in the footage as belonging instead to the King Abdulaziz Centre for World Culture (KACWC), also known as the Ithra culture centre, in Saudi Arabia. It reports that the video shows daylight fireworks associated with Ithra’s Tanween 2018 cultural event, not Holi or the Atal tunnel. To investigate the footage, the review describes reverse image searches that found similar visuals shared online as fireworks at the Ithra building. It also cites a social-media post by an assistant professor that described the footage as a daylight fireworks show at Ithra. The review says it checked the event using relevant search terms and found that Ithra held the Tanween 2018 event with daylight fireworks on 20 October 2018; it adds that Ithra published videos of the event on its official social-media accounts. The review also compared the building in the video with the Atal tunnel. It says a Google Maps search showed a similar view of the Ithra building, while the Ministry of Tourism had tweeted visuals of the Atal tunnel in Himachal Pradesh. The review notes that the tunnel was inaugurated on 3 October 2020 and says it looks completely different from the building in the footage. These comparisons support the conclusion that the video’s setting and event do not match the post’s description.

FACTLYCulture & entertainment

Video of actor Ajay Devgan getting beaten over the farmers’ protest issue in Delhi

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

FACTLY examined a social-media video said to show actor Ajay Devgan being beaten in Delhi over the farmers’ protest. Its review identifies the footage instead as a fight between two groups in Aerocity, New Delhi. It reports that the altercation followed one vehicle slightly touching another, not a dispute involving Devgan or the protest: “The video is in no way related to Ajay Devgan. The video shows a fight between two groups at Aerocity in New Delhi.” To check the clip’s provenance, the review says it ran screenshots through Google Reverse Image Search and found the same video published by multiple news agencies. It identifies an India Today YouTube upload dated 27 March 2021, whose description says the clash began after a car crashed into another. The review also cites reports of police saying two men were arrested after the vehicle contact and that the parties did not file complaints against each other; police nevertheless registered a case under sections concerning affray and COVID-protocol violations. The review further cites an India Today report of a clarification from Devgan’s team: he had not visited Delhi since promoting a film in January 2020. It also records Devgan’s 29 March 2021 tweet saying he had not travelled anywhere and that reports of his involvement in a brawl were baseless. Together, the footage’s reported Aerocity provenance and these statements contradict the identification of the person in the video as Devgan and the claimed connection to the farmers’ protest.

Deutsche Presse-AgenturCulture & entertainment

Die Liste stammt von Marx und ist unter der Katalognummer 3926 im Britischen Museum zu finden.

Publisher’s rating: Dass die Liste von Karl Marx stammt, kann nicht belegt werden. Die als Quelle genannte Kennzahl im British Museum existiert nicht, wird aber auch regelmäßig in Zusammenhang mit einem antisemitischen Text genannt, in dem viele der aufgelisteten Punkte vorkommen.

The claim concerns a 19-point list circulating online that was attributed to Karl Marx and cited “Katalog-Nr. 3926 im britischen Museum London” as its source. The investigation checked both parts: whether the list could be found in Marx’s work and whether the stated catalogue number led to a British Museum record. It reports that searching an online edition of *Das Kapital* for terms appearing in the list—including “Impfgifte,” “Ungebildete” and “Familien zerstören”—produced no matches. The Marx scholar Michael Quante told dpa that the list was not by Marx, that he knew of no source collecting those points, and that Marx generally offered diagnoses rather than such instructions.

Pagella PoliticaCulture & entertainment

«Dante, il “Sommo poeta”, censurato e ritradotto in una versione politicamente corretta, in Olanda e Belgio, in quanto offende gli islamici nei versi della Divina Commedia»

Publisher’s rating: Vero

Pagella Politica examined Lorenzo Fontana’s 25 March 2021 Facebook claim that Dante had been censored and retranslated in the Netherlands and Belgium to avoid offending Muslims. Its review identifies the relevant case as a Dutch-language edition published by Blossom Books, based in the Netherlands and serving readers there and in the Flemish regions of Belgium. The review says it checked the claim and found it substantially correct: the edition omitted Muhammad’s name from the relevant passage of the Divine Comedy. The passage is in Canto XXVIII of the Inferno. In Dante’s account, Muhammad is among those punished for sowing discord: a demon repeatedly wounds and dismembers the sinners. The review reports that the edition’s Flemish translator, Lies Lavrijsen, made the omission in consultation with Blossom Books. The publisher’s stated rationale was to avoid unnecessarily offending Muslim readers; its owner, Myrthe Spiteri, also argued that naming Muhammad was not necessary to understand the literary text. The review describes both the scope and the reaction to the change. It concerns the omission of Muhammad’s name in one edition, not the removal of the Divine Comedy as a whole. The decision drew criticism in the Netherlands and Belgium, including from literary figures and translators; the review reports that some objectors considered the omission a mistaken form of censorship that deprived readers of part of the text. It also notes the publisher’s explanation that the excised detail was unnecessary for comprehension. The specific alteration and the publisher’s stated reason support the claim’s central point, while the edition-level detail clarifies what was changed.

MediaWiseCulture & entertainment

Slenderman is seen in Disney's "Beauty and the Beast"

Publisher’s rating: Not Legit

The claim concerns a video that purportedly shows Slenderman in the ballroom scene of Disney’s “Beauty and the Beast.” MediaWise says the video was posted on YouTube by “mattydeaks,” whose channel also featured supposed Slenderman appearances in other Disney films. The review treated that pattern as a reason to investigate whether the clips were genuine, rather than as independent confirmation of the claim. [S1: “The video was posted by a user named ‘mattydeaks.’ Looking at the channel as a whole, there are actually several of these style videos, with Slenderman supposedly making appearances in ‘Frozen 2,’ ‘Cinderella’ and ‘Ratatouille.’ Having so many of these videos is definitely a red flag.”] The review then traced the video to the creator’s TikTok account. It reports finding several editing tutorials there, including one about inserting oneself into movies, and says the creator had editing skills relevant to assessing a manipulated clip. [S1: “Skimming through their content, there are several video editing tutorials, including a video about how to edit yourself into movies. Clearly, this is a creator with some impressive editing skills.”] MediaWise says it compared the claimed appearance with the film’s ballroom scene and found that Slenderman does not appear in the movie. It concludes that the viral video was edited to add the character. The review also mentions a Snopes fact-check, but its described comparison with the original film is the direct evidence it presents for this claim. [S1: “Watching the ballroom scene, it’s clear that Slenderman doesn’t actually make an appearance in the movie.”] [S1: “The viral video was edited to include the creepy character.”]