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

After being denied a room in the hotel inaugurated by him, Arnold Schwarzenegger slept in front of the statue at the hotel.

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim attached to the image was that Arnold Schwarzenegger had been refused a room in a hotel he had inaugurated, and then slept in front of his statue at that hotel. FACTLY’s investigation says the statue was not at a hotel: it was at the Greater Columbus Convention Center. The review places the photograph in Ohio in 2016, when Schwarzenegger was there for a movie shooting and visited the convention centre. To check the image’s context, the review says it searched for news articles published about the photo in 2016 and found the same image in a Daily Mail article. That article described Schwarzenegger as pretending to sleep and possibly appear homeless beneath a statue of himself. FACTLY also cites a People article describing him taking a catnap in front of the statue, and an E! News article identifying the location outside the Greater Columbus Convention Center. These accounts support a staged or playful pose at a convention centre, not the hotel-room story. The review further reports that Schwarzenegger posted the photograph to his social media accounts in January 2016 with the caption “How times have changed.” It says he did not mention being denied a room or give the story claimed in the circulating post. Taken together, the location, contemporaneous descriptions, and the post’s stated caption undermine the claim’s key details: that this was a hotel, that he had inaugurated it, and that a room denial led to the pose.

FACTLYCulture & entertainment

Satyajit Ray photo in 1953.

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim concerns an image circulated with the wording “Ray before Bond! 1953,” said to show filmmaker Satyajit Ray beside a car in that year. FACTLY reports that it checked the image using Google reverse-image search and found a Getty Images result showing a similar photograph. Its comparison found that the two images were the same except for the face of the person shown in the circulating version. The Getty description identified the person in its photograph as actor Sean Connery, posing as James Bond beside an Aston Martin DB5 in a scene from the 1964 film Goldfinger. That identification and the image comparison underpin FACTLY’s conclusion that the circulated image had been altered to substitute Ray’s face; it is not evidence of Ray in a 1953 photograph. The excerpt describes the search and comparison but does not provide a direct link to the archived social-media post or the Getty image.

YouturnCulture & entertainment

இதை நாகரீகம் என்ற போர்வையில் போட்டு திரியும் எத்தனை இளைஞர்களுக்கு தெரியும். இந்த லோ ஹிப் ஜீன்சின் அர்த்தம் ? தெரிந்து கொள்ளுங்கள், அமெரிக்க சிறை கைதிகள் தங்களை ஓரினச் சேர்க்கைக்கு தயார் என்பதை காட்டவே இந்த அரைகுறையான உடையை அணிந்தனர். இதைப் பற்றி தெரிந்த பின்பு எத்தனை பேருக்கு இந்த அவமானத்தை அணிய விருப்பம் ?

Publisher’s rating: Fake

Fact CrescendoCulture & entertainment

Claim: Nakkheeran magazine to be closed soon

Publisher’s rating: Fact Crescendo Rating: False

The claim concerned a social-media post saying that Nakkheeran, a Tamil investigative magazine, was closing because it was losing money. The review describes the post as shared with a photograph of Nakkheeran Gopal and quotes its message as saying that the magazine was closing due to losses. The post was attributed in the article to Govind Palaniguru. To check the closure claim, Fact Crescendo says it looked for an announcement on Nakkheeran’s website and searched Google for reports from Nakkheeran or other media. It says it found no such announcement or report. The article then reports that it contacted Nakkheeran’s legal adviser, Sivakumar, who said the closure story was a rumour. The review’s conclusion rests on those checks and the legal adviser’s statement: it found no supporting announcement or news coverage and reports that Nakkheeran’s legal adviser denied the claim as a rumour. The supplied excerpt does not provide independent financial records or other documentation about the magazine’s finances.