Skip to main content

PeakMetrics / Fact Checks

Economy & business fact checks

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

7,093 published reviews in this topic

El Detector / Univision NoticiasEconomy & business

El empresario mexicano Carlos Slim le dio una entrevista a Danielle Dithurbide en la que promovió inversiones en criptomonedas a través de una plataforma digital.

Publisher’s rating: Falso

The claim concerns an alleged interview in which Carlos Slim promoted a cryptocurrency investment platform. The review says the story circulated through a Facebook post linking to a page that imitated the Mexican news outlet Debate. It describes the page’s account of Slim appearing on Despierta, hosted by Danielle Dithurbide, and promoting an automated cryptocurrency-trading program said to use artificial intelligence. The review identifies several names used for the supposed program, including +360 Soft Bit App, XBT iFex 360 Ai and Bit 360 Daypro. (S1: “Sin fecha de publicación, el artículo comienza describiendo al mexicano”; “El nombre de este programa, según observamos, varía pues a veces es llamado +360 Soft Bit App y en otras ocasiones XBT iFex 360 Ai o Bit 360 Daypro.”) The central evidence was a direct response from Grupo Carso’s corporate communications and government relations deputy director, Renato Flores Cartas. The review reports that he denied both elements of the story: that Slim had given the interview and that he had promoted cryptocurrency investments on digital platforms. The review’s conclusion likewise rejects the claim about the interview and promotion. (S1: “El ingeniero Slim no le ha dado entrevistas a Danielle y nunca ha promocionado inversiones en criptomonedas, no en plataformas digitales”; “Renato Flores Cartas, subdirector de Comunicación y Relaciones Gubernamentales de Grupo Carso, negó que Slim haya dado la supuesta entrevista y promocionado inversiones de criptomonedas en plataformas digitales.”) The review also checked the purported article’s provenance. It says the URL was forumnapoli.com, not Debate’s debate.com.mx, and that the page’s menu and article links led to the same form requesting personal information rather than allowing normal navigation. The review reports that searches for the claimed interview and cryptocurrency promotion did not find information supporting the Facebook post. These checks, together with Grupo Carso’s denial, are the evidence the review presents against the claim. (S1: “el url del sitio web que se observa es ‘forumnapoli.com’ y no corresponde al de Debate, que es ‘debate.com.mx’”; “no hallamos información que avalara lo divulgado en Facebook.”)

dpaEconomy & business

Deze chocoladereep met insecten wordt echt door Ritter Sport verkocht.

Publisher’s rating: Deze chocoladereep bestaat niet echt. Het was een grap van Ritter Sport. Het Duitse chocolademerk deelt vaker 'nepsoorten', ook deze met krekels hoort daarbij.

The claim concerned a green Ritter Sport wrapper labelled “Ganze Grille” (“whole crickets”), which circulated online with warnings that the company was selling a new insect-filled chocolate bar. The review identifies the wrapper as a joke rather than a product: Ritter Sport shared it on social media, and its Instagram post included the hashtag #fakesorte, linking it to the brand’s fake varieties. The review also says the cricket bar was not listed in Ritter Sport’s product range.

FACTLYEconomy & business

67 సంవత్సరాల చరిత్ర లో LIC డబ్బులు ఒక్క రూపాయి కూడా వృధా కాలేదు, కానీ ఈ రోజు మొదటి సారి 18 వేల కోట్ల నష్టాన్ని చవి చూసింది ఎందుకంటే దేశం సురక్షితమైన వారి చేతుల్లో లేదు’ – దీపికా పదుకొనే

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

FACTLYEconomy & business

Video comparing original Amul pack with that of a duplicate pack

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The review examined a social-media video presented as showing an authentic Amul butter pack beside a counterfeit pack allegedly made in China. It reports that the comparison was misleading: both packs shown in the video were genuine Amul products manufactured in India. The review’s stated conclusion was that the apparent differences did not demonstrate that one pack was fake. [S1: “Both the packs shown in the video are genuine Amul packs, manufactured in India.”] To check the video, the article says it searched Google using relevant keywords and found a clarification from Amul on Twitter. According to the review’s account of that clarification, the two packs showed old and new packaging, rather than genuine and duplicate products. [S1: “Google search with relevant keywords led us to a tweet by Amul, which clarified about the viral video.”] [S1: “It stated that video shows two packs, of which one carried old packing, whereas the other carried new packing, as per the latest FSSAI advisory.”] The review further reports that Amul explained the new pack’s front carried a vegetarian logo in accordance with the latest FSSAI advisory. This packaging change accounted for a visible difference that the post treated as evidence of counterfeiting. The excerpt does not provide the tweet’s date or reproduce its full text, so those details cannot be established from the supplied material. [S1: “Further, it clarified that the new pack bears a veg logo on the front of the pack in accordance with FSSAI new rule.”]