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.

12,754 published reviews in this topic

FACTLYPolitics & government

Video of a rally in Maharashtra in support of recent farmers’ protest in Delhi.

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim concerns a video presented as showing a rally in Maharashtra in support of the farmers protesting in Delhi. FACTLY says the video does not depict a rally connected to those protests. Its review reports that reverse-image searches of screenshots led to the same video, which a YouTube user had published in April 2018. That establishes the video was online well before the new agricultural laws were passed in Parliament, so it could not document the recent protest as claimed. The review distinguishes what its checks established from what they did not: it says the rally’s exact details could not be determined, but argues that the video’s earlier online appearance rules out a connection to the later protests. It describes the circulating post as recasting an old rally video as one supporting the Delhi farmers’ agitation.

Fact CrescendoPolitics & government

एक पगड़ी पहना हुआ शख्स पाकिस्तान का झंड़ा फहराते हुए प्रधानमंत्री नरेंद्र मोदी के खिलाफ नारे लगाते हुए नज़र आएगा व पाकिस्तान और खालिस्तान ज़िंदाबाद के नारे भी लगाते हुए दिखेगा

Publisher’s rating: False

Vishvas NewsPolitics & government

பஞ்சாப் விவசாயிகளுக்கும் காஷ்மீர் 370 & 35A சட்டத்திற்க்கும் என்னடா சம்பந்தம்??

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim asks what Punjab farmers have to do with Kashmir’s Articles 370 and 35A. In the reviewed Facebook post, that question accompanied a photograph presented as showing farmers at the recent protest against India’s new farm laws holding banners calling for the provisions to be restored. The investigation says the photograph was old and was not connected to that farmers’ protest. To trace the image, Vishvas News reports using Google’s reverse-image search. It says the search found the photograph on the Shiromani Akali Dal Facebook page, posted on 8 August 2019. The review contrasts that date with the recent farmers’ protest, which it says had only recently begun, and concludes the photograph was not from that event. The review also reports contacting Nitin Dhiman, an Amritsar correspondent for Dainik Jagran. Dhiman said the image was from Shiromani Akali Dal’s 2019 protest seeking restoration of Articles 370 and 35A, and had no connection to the recent farmers’ protest. Together, the image’s earlier posting and the reporter’s account address the central implication of the viral post: the photograph does not establish that Punjab farmers were making that demand during their farm-law protest.

FACTLYPolitics & government

Photos related to recent farmers’ protest in Delhi

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

FACTLY examined four photos circulating in connection with farmers’ protests in Delhi against new agricultural laws. Its central finding was that the images predated the Delhi protest and did not depict it. The review compared the images with older online posts and news coverage, and found earlier uses for three photos and an older publication matching the fourth. For the first photo, reverse-image searching led to a Facebook post from September 2017 and news-agency coverage from that month relating to farmer protests in Rajasthan. The review also identified a 5 September 2017 CPI(M) tweet describing farmers led by AIKS in Rajasthan, as well as a September 2017 tweet by Sitaram Yechury. This places the image in a different protest and year, rather than the recent Delhi event. For the second photo, FACTLY found the same image in a Mumbai Live tweet from March 2018. Its description placed the march on the Eastern Expressway opposite Viviana Mall in Thane, as farmers marched toward Mumbai. The third photo had been shared online since at least September 2016, though the review says it could not establish its exact original circumstances. The fourth matched a Hindustan Times article from February 2017, whose caption identified Jat women protesters on their way to Jassia village during a reservation agitation in Rohtak. The review distinguishes the old images from the protests occurring in Delhi at the time: it says thousands of farmers were protesting there, but that fact did not establish that these particular photos showed that event. Its conclusion rests on the earlier, separately identified uses of the images, not on a claim that no farmers were protesting in Delhi.

Factcrescendo Sri LankaPolitics & government

මයික් පොම්පියෝ මහතා මෙරටට පැමිනෙන නිසා MCC විරෝධී සිතුවමක් මකා දමන අවස්ථාවක් ද ?

Publisher’s rating: False

The claim concerned a video presented as showing an MCC-opposition mural being removed because U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was visiting Sri Lanka. The review says Pompeo arrived on October 27 and describes the video as having been circulated with that implication. Its investigation, however, identified the footage as showing an earlier removal: “2019 දෙසැම්බර් මාසයේදී” a video of the same incident had been posted under the title “ඇමරිකානු MCC විරෝධී බිත්ති චිත්‍රය මකා දැමේ!” The review says stills from that earlier video matched the scenes in the newly circulated clip. To check the video’s history and location, the review says it compared the footage with the earlier YouTube video and examined reporting about the mural. It places the painting on a wall at the Keells supermarket on Beddagana, Thalawathugoda Road, in Pita Kotte, and reports that it was removed in December 2019—months before Pompeio’s visit. Thus, the footage did show a mural being whitewashed, but it did not show a removal prompted by that visit. The review also qualifies accounts of why the mural was removed. It says the two people who created it stated in an interview that neither its creation nor removal was for a government or other political purpose; they said pressure on the supermarket and a resulting concern about two employees’ jobs led to its removal. This qualification does not change the video’s earlier date, but it cautions against treating the removal as evidence of a political decision tied to Pompeio’s arrival.