Skip to main content

PeakMetrics / Fact Checks

Elections & voting fact checks

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

5,414 published reviews in this topic

Deutsche Presse-AgenturElections & voting

Eine Studie über den Zusammenhang von Benfordschem Gesetz und den Ergebnissen bei Bundestagswahlen beweist systematischen Wahlbetrug.

Publisher’s rating: Falsch

The claim misrepresents what the 2011 study by political scientists Christian Breunig and Achim Goerres examined. The researchers analyzed results from Germany’s 1990–2005 Bundestag elections, looking at about 80,000 constituencies. They compared the frequency of second-position digits in vote totals for specified parties and their direct candidates with the frequencies expected under Benford’s Law. The study found some departures from that statistical pattern; the review makes clear that a departure is not, by itself, proof that votes were manipulated. The distinction is central to the study’s own reported conclusions. The review quotes the authors saying that departures may indicate irregularities, including either deliberate fraud or unintentional human error. But it also reports their finding that there was “no evidence of systematic fraud or mismanagement” in candidate votes in constituencies where fraud was most likely. At state level, the analysis found 51 departures in 190 tests of parties’ list-vote results, but the study did not explain what caused them. The review also cites Goerres’s later explanation that the findings should not cast doubt on the legality of the count, and the German government’s 2011 statement that the study did not establish errors in past election results, much less their deliberate manipulation. The evidence therefore supports a narrower conclusion: some results departed from the expected digit pattern, while the analysis did not demonstrate systematic election fraud.