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.

7,103 published reviews in this topic

Pagella PoliticaEconomy & business

L'Emilia-Romagna è da cinque anni la prima regione per crescita in questo Paese.

Publisher’s rating: Pinocchio andante

On 2 September 2019, Emilia-Romagna president Stefano Bonaccini said on La7 that his region had been Italy’s leading region for growth for five years. Pagella Politica checked the claim against regional GDP growth figures published by Italy’s national statistics institute, Istat. It explains that those figures can change, sometimes significantly, when Istat updates its data, and says it used Istat’s database to compare annual regional GDP changes from 2013 through 2017. The figures reported in the review do not support a five-year run at the top. In 2017, Emilia-Romagna’s GDP grew 2.21 per cent, placing it seventh; in 2016 it grew 2.66 per cent and ranked fourth. The review says the region did not lead in either of the other two years examined: its 2015 growth of 1.98 per cent ranked tenth, and its 2014 growth of 2.14 per cent ranked fourth. Thus, for every year in the 2013–2017 comparison, the review reports that another region ranked ahead. The review also addresses a possible source of Bonaccini’s claim: a December 2018 regional economic report that projected Emilia-Romagna would be among the fastest-growing regions in 2018 and 2019. That forecast was not evidence that it had ranked first over the preceding five years. The review says the underlying Prometeia estimates did not describe Emilia-Romagna as the top region for GDP growth over those five years.

Pagella PoliticaEconomy & business

Per l’undicesimo mese consecutivo l’attività manifatturiera italiana è in contrazione.

Publisher’s rating: Pinocchio andante

Renzi’s statement concerned whether Italian manufacturing had contracted for eleven consecutive months. The review compared the monthly Istat manufacturing indicator with the PMI, a separate survey-based measure of manufacturing conditions. The two measures produced different results, so the claim depends on which indicator is meant. Istat’s latest figures available to the review covered June 2019. They showed manufacturing activity falling 0.4 per cent that month, but rising 1 per cent in May. The review also identifies increases in February, January and October 2018; the other listed months had declines. Thus, on the Istat measure, the eleven-month sequence was not uninterrupted contraction: the indicator was positive in four months. The review notes that figures for July and August were not yet available. The PMI appeared to support the eleven-month description, but it measures reported general conditions rather than the same thing as Istat’s production data. In August it stood at 48.7, below the 50 threshold associated with contraction, although this was a slight improvement from July’s 48.5. The review therefore distinguishes a negative PMI reading from a claim that Istat’s measured manufacturing activity fell in every month. It concludes that Renzi’s statement was incorrect when assessed against Istat, while acknowledging that the PMI showed eleven consecutive months of worsening conditions.

NewtralEconomy & business

Mercadona ha comercializado productos de Magrudis

Publisher’s rating: Falso

Newtral investigated a message circulating on social media that claimed Mercadona had sold “carne mechada” made by the Seville-based company Magrudis. The review reports that it found no evidence that this had happened and says Newtral contacted Mercadona’s communications team for comment. Mercadona denied selling Magrudis’s “La Mechá” branded pulled pork, said it had no commercial relationship with the supplier, and also denied commercial dealings involving meat products connected to Comercial Martínez de León. The finding is therefore specifically about the alleged sale of these products and supplier relationships; the excerpt does not describe independent sales records or other documentary checks.

Pagella PoliticaEconomy & business

Anche per l'ipotesi dell'avvio del nuovo Governo con il Pd [...] solo con i risultati dell’asta dei titoli di Stato di stamattina risparmieremo 300 milioni di euro di interessi. Che ora andranno nelle tasche degli italiani.

Publisher’s rating: Nì

The claim concerned Nicola Zingaretti’s statement that the 29 August 2019 government-bond auction meant Italy would save €300 million in interest, with the money going into Italians’ pockets. Pagella Politica examined the Treasury’s auction results and compared the new yields with those at the previous auctions. Its calculation focused on the fixed-rate five- and ten-year BTPs, excluding CCTeu securities because their rates vary over time. The review notes that the Treasury placed €4 billion of ten-year BTPs at a 0.96% yield, down from 1.56% at the end of July, and €2.25 billion of five-year BTPs at 0.32%, down from 0.80%. The review calculated that the lower ten-year yield meant €240 million less in interest over ten years than if the earlier yield had applied; for the five-year bonds, it calculated a €54 million difference over five years. Together, those comparisons produce €294 million, close to the figure in the claim. But that is projected interest savings on the bonds sold in that auction, over their respective terms—not an immediate payment to citizens. The review says there is no automatic mechanism directing the lower interest expense to public services or other benefits for Italians, and that the budgetary effect depends on the lower-yield trend continuing. The claim also linked the savings to the new government. The review said the political change may have contributed to the fall in Italian yields, but cautioned that it was not the only plausible explanation. It pointed to earlier declines while the Lega–M5S government was in office and a broader fall in EU government-bond yields that had begun in October 2018. Its conclusion was that the auction figures supported a saving close to €300 million, while the claim overstated both the immediacy of that saving and the certainty that it would benefit citizens directly.

Fact CrescendoEconomy & business

Claim: Parle decided to dismiss 10000 staffs

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The review investigates a Facebook post claiming that Parle had decided to dismiss 10,000 employees. It says the post, shared by Nagarajan Kk on August 23, 2019, also blamed a GST tax increase for the company’s difficulties. The review distinguishes that definite claim of a decision from what Parle Category Head Mayank Shah was reported to have said. According to the review, Shah described Parle as facing difficulties amid an economic slowdown and said that, if the situation continued, the company might have to reduce its workforce by 8,000 to 10,000 employees. The review notes that some outlets connected the reported difficulties to GST, but says the accounts still described possible future layoffs—not an adopted decision or an immediate plan to dismiss 10,000 people. The review further reports that Shah later denied the claim and provided an explanation after it began circulating online. Its central finding is that the Facebook post turned a conditional possibility into a claim that Parle had already decided to dismiss the employees. The excerpt does not provide the linked interview or Shah’s later statement in full, so their details cannot be independently assessed from the supplied text.

FACTLYEconomy & business

Employment for five qualified persons from every village under the Saur Urja Mission Training and Employment Scheme.

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim concerns letters asking village sarpanches to select five qualified people for jobs under a named scheme, the “Saur Urja Mission Training and Employment Scheme.” FACTLY’s review examined the authenticity of those letters. Its central finding was that no government scheme with that name existed, so the letters did not establish that the advertised employment offer was genuine. The review describes searches for the scheme on Google and on the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy website; it says neither search found the scheme. It distinguishes the named scheme from the Suryamitra Scheme, which it describes as providing solar-sector training. That distinction matters: the existence of a differently named training scheme does not verify the employment promise in the letters. FACTLY also points to details in the letters that it says are inconsistent with official recruitment: applicants were asked to send a Rs. 1,000 demand draft payable to the private firm Urja Enterprises, and the letter contained spelling and grammatical errors and no ministry or department name. The review concludes that the letters were fake. Its evidence addresses the authenticity of the specific scheme and recruitment letters, rather than demonstrating that five jobs were actually available in each village.

NewtralEconomy & business

Recibo de cobro de la Renta Mínima de Inserción que corresponde a un MENA

Publisher’s rating: Falso

The claim concerned a Bankia receipt circulating online as proof that an unaccompanied foreign minor received Madrid’s Renta Mínima de Inserción, or minimum-insertion income benefit. The review separates whether the receipt itself was genuine from whether the viral message correctly identified its recipient: Bankia sources told Newtral that the receipt was real, but said it belonged to a customer of about 50 who had been with the bank for 20 years—not to a minor. They also said the customer had worked and paid into Social Security while holding a long-term residence card. [S1] The review also checked whether a minor could qualify for the Madrid benefit. It describes the program’s eligibility rules as requiring legal residence and setting age ranges that all require adulthood. One listed route is for applicants aged 18 to 25, but only if they had been in the care of the Community of Madrid until reaching adulthood, among other conditions. The review says this excludes unaccompanied foreign minors as minors from receiving the benefit. [S1] Finally, the message referred to a payment of more than €600. Newtral reported asking 16 autonomous communities responsible for the guardianship of 94% of unaccompanied foreign minors in Spain; those communities said they had no payment for such minors reaching that amount. The evidence therefore challenges both the receipt’s attribution to a minor and the claim that minors received the stated payment. [S1]