Skip to main content

PeakMetrics / Fact Checks

Politics & government fact checks

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

12,749 published reviews in this topic

APA - Austria Presse AgenturPolitics & government

Die Medien berichten gar nicht oder nicht ausreichend zu den Bauernprotesten in den Niederlanden.

Publisher’s rating: Weder stimmt die Behauptung, dass die etablierten Medien die Bauernproteste ignorieren oder gar verheimlichen würden, noch stammt das geteilte Foto von den aktuellen Protesten.

The claim was that established media were not reporting, or were reporting too little about, Dutch farmers’ protests. The review addresses the allegation that coverage was absent or concealed, and describes protests against planned reductions in the Netherlands’ nitrogen emissions. It reports that the protests had already received media coverage before the social-media post under examination appeared: reporting began before the first protests formed, and a Google News search for the topic returned numerous results even when restricted to the period before the post of 4 July. This evidence contradicts the claim that there was no reporting. The excerpt does not quantify coverage or set a benchmark for what would count as “enough,” so it does not establish how much coverage would be sufficient. The review also investigated the photograph often shared with the complaint about media coverage. It found that the image was not from the protests in the first week of July 2022, but from a protest in Bilthoven in 2019. The review says the image had also appeared in some current media articles, a detail that could make it seem connected to the later protests. Its comparison of the scene’s features, including the positions of bystanders and vehicles and the viewing angle, identified the older image as the one used in the posts.

Factcrescendo Sri LankaPolitics & government

Image Of Gotabaya Rajapaksa Inside The Flight – Maldives To Singapore!!

Publisher’s rating: Misleading

The claim concerned a photograph circulating in Sri Lanka on the evening of July 14, 2022, said to show former president Gotabaya Rajapaksa aboard the flight from the Maldives to Singapore. The review reports that Rajapaksa had travelled to the Maldives on July 13 and then flown to Singapore, and says the image was shared as a recent view from that journey. The investigation concluded that the photograph was not from the Singapore trip. To trace the image, the review says it used Google Reverse Image Search. That search led to an image published on Rajapaksa’s official page in December 2016. Its caption placed him on the way to Nagoya, Japan, and mentioned a view of Mount Fuji. The review further reports that the image was posted on December 16, 2016. The review identifies Udaya Gammanpila in the photograph, seated behind Rajapaksa, and says he had accompanied Rajapaksa on the Japan tour. This establishes the image’s earlier setting and explains why some viewers may have mistaken it for a recent photograph: the same former minister was also visible in the image being circulated. The photograph therefore predates Rajapaksa’s 2019 presidency and does not show his 2022 flight to Singapore.

Factcrescendo Sri LankaPolitics & government

Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s Resignation Letter !

Publisher’s rating: False

The claim concerns two letters circulated on social media as Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s official resignation letters in July 2022. The review says one version circulated without a signature and that a second version, with a signature, went viral again on the evening of July 14. It concludes that neither was the official letter. The distinction matters: the fact that Rajapaksa later resigned does not authenticate either of the circulating documents. The review describes checks against the constitutional requirement for a resignation letter and direct inquiries to relevant officials. It cites the Constitution’s provision that a president vacates office by sending a letter under his signature to the Speaker, and says the Bar Association president confirmed that requirement. The first viral letter lacked a signature; the review therefore says it was not valid as a document vacating the presidency. The Speaker’s spokesperson also said on the morning of July 14 that the Speaker had not received such a letter at that time. For the later version bearing a signature, the review reports that the Speaker’s spokesperson said on the night of July 14 that it was still not the official resignation letter. The President’s Media Unit also confirmed that the social-media letter was not an official letter sent to the Speaker. The review distinguishes these viral versions from the official resignation: it reports that the Speaker confirmed receipt of the official letter and announced on July 15 that Rajapaksa had vacated office from July 14. Thus, the official resignation did not make the previously circulated letters genuine.

Factcrescendo Sri LankaPolitics & government

ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂගේ ඉල්ලා අස්වීමේ ලිපිය ද?

Publisher’s rating: False

The review examined a document circulating on social media as Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s resignation letter to the Speaker. The purported letter referred to causes of Sri Lanka’s economic crisis, apologized for the failure of organic farming, and said Rajapaksa had decided to resign in response to the public’s demands. The article notes that the circulated version initially had no signature, which prompted doubts about its authenticity. The review’s conclusion concerns this particular circulated document, not whether Rajapaksa later resigned. Evidence: “සමාජ ජාලා සටහන් ජනාධිපති ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂගේ ඉල්ලා අස්වීමේ ලිපිය ලෙස සදහන් ලිපියක් සමාජ ජාල තුළ සංසරණය වූ අතර”; “ජුලි 09 වැනිදා පොරොන්දු වූ පරිදි ජනතා හඬට ඇහුම්කන් දෙමින් ජනපති ධුරයෙන් ඉල්ලා අස්වීමට තීරණය කළ බව දක්වමින් කථානායකවරයා වෙත එවන ලද ඉල්ලිම අස්වීමේ ලිපිය ලෙස හුවා දැක්වූ පහත ලිපියේ අත්සනක් දක්නට ද ලැබුනේ නැති බැවින්”. To assess the document, the review cited Article 38(1)(b) of Sri Lanka’s Constitution, which it says requires a president to vacate office by a signed letter to the Speaker. It reports that Bar Association of Sri Lanka president Saliya Pieris confirmed this requirement. Since the circulated letter bore no signature, the review said it could not serve as a valid resignation letter. Evidence: “ජනපති විසින් සිය ධුරය හිස් කල හැක්කේ කතානායකවරයා වෙත තමාගේ අත්සනින් යවනු ලබන ලිපියකින් බවයි”; “ශ්‍රී ලංකා නීතිඥ සංගමයේ සභාපති සාලිය පීරිස් මහතාගෙන් ද විමසා සිටි අතර ඔහු ද එය තහවුරු කර සිටියා”; “සමාජ මාධ්‍ය ඔස්සේ හුවමාරු වන ලිපියේ ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂ මහතාගේ අත්සනක් දක්නට නොලැබෙන බැවින්, එය ජනපති විසින් සිය ධුරයෙන් ඉවත්වීම සඳහා යොමුකළ ලිපියක් ලෙස වලංගුභාවයක් ද නොමැත.” The review also checked with the Speaker’s media spokesperson and the President’s Media Division. It reports that, as of the morning of July 14, the Speaker’s office had received no resignation letter from Rajapaksa, and that the President’s Media Division said the circulating document was not an official letter. The article then distinguishes that fake document from a later development: on July 14, after Rajapaksa reached Singapore, the Speaker’s office said a resignation letter had been sent through the Sri Lankan High Commission there and was being checked. A revised version of the circulating document, now with a signature, was also described as not official. Evidence: “ඔහු අවධාරණය කලේ ද මෙවන් ඉල්ලා අස්වීමේ ලිපියක් ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂ ජනාධිපතිවරයා විසින් කතානායකවරයා වෙත මේ දක්වා (ජුලි 14 උදෑසන) යොමු කර නොමැති බවයි”; “ජනාධිපති ගෝඨාභය රාජපක්ෂ මහතා සිය ඉල්ලා අස්වීමේ ලිපිය, ශ්‍රී ලංකාවේ සිංගප්පුරු තානාපති කාර්යාලය හරහා මේ වනවිට එවා ඇති බවත්, එහි නිරවද්‍යතාවය පිළිබඳ නැවත පරික්ෂා කිරීමෙන් පසු ඉදිරි කටයුතු සිදුකරන බවත්, කතානායක කාර්යාලය පවසනවා.”

Fact CrescendoPolitics & government

លោក ហ៊ុន ម៉ាណែត កូន​ប្រុស​ច្បង​លោក​នាយករដ្ឋ​មន្ត្រី ហ៊ុន សែន ថត​រូប​ស៊ែលហ្វី​ជាមួយ​សព​នារី​ម្នាក់​ឈ្មោះ ចេវ សុវឌ្ឍនា។

Publisher’s rating: រូបថត​ច្បាប់​ដើម គឺ​បង្ហាញ​ឱ្យ​ឃើញ​លោក ហ៊ុន ម៉ាណែត ថត​រូប​ខ្លួន​ឯង​នៅ​ឯ​ទីវាល​មាន​ទេសភាព​វាល​ស្មៅ និង​ភ្នំ។

Factcrescendo Sri LankaPolitics & government

ජනපති මැදුරට හානි කරන ලෙස, අගමැති ආරක්ෂක අංශයෙන් මුදල් ලබාගත් බව පාපොච්චාරණ කළ බවට Newsfirst පුවතක්!!

Publisher’s rating: False

The claim concerned a supposed Newsfirst report that two people in custody had confessed to receiving money from a Prime Minister’s security officer to damage the President’s House. The review places the rumor amid events following the July 9, 2022 unrest near Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe’s private residence, which was set on fire. It distinguishes that actual incident from the separate allegation about damage to the President’s House.