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

Recent video of Barack Obama dumping the gift by the Trump couple given to calm the anger of black people

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim concerned a video presented as recent footage of Barack Obama dumping a gift from Donald and Melania Trump, supposedly given to calm anger among Black people. FACTLY says the video instead depicts an event at the White House in 2017, after Trump’s victory in the 2016 presidential election. The review describes the circulated clip as edited, rather than as a recent recording of the alleged incident. To check the footage, FACTLY reports searching for similar videos and looking for the CNN video because the posted clip carried a CNN watermark. It found a similar video on CNN’s YouTube channel, described as showing Obama greeting President-elect Trump at the White House. FACTLY says that in the original footage Obama takes the gift inside and hands it to a staffer—not that he dumps it. The review also says videos from other angles show Obama taking the gift inside. These details contradict the central claim about both the video’s timing and what Obama did with the gift.

Fact CrescendoPolitics & government

Supreme Court ordered to rename the India as Bharat from 15 June

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

Fact Crescendo investigated a viral claim that the Supreme Court had ordered India’s name to be only Bharat in every language from 15 June 2020. The review describes checking whether the court had actually issued such an order, rather than treating the circulating message as evidence of one. Its conclusion was that the claim was false. The review reports that it found an ANI tweet dated 2 June 2020 saying the Supreme Court was to hear a petition seeking to replace “India” with “Bharat” as the country’s English name. That was a report of a hearing about a petition, not an announcement that the court had ordered a nationwide name change. To establish what happened, the fact-check says it consulted the Supreme Court’s website and found that the petition to change the English name from India to Bharat had been rejected. It therefore concluded that the court had not ordered the country to be called Bharat in every language from 15 June 2020.

FACTLYPolitics & government

Dainik Jagran’s article on Hardik Patel stating the plan to discredit Modi by spreading violence in the country, and Kejriwal’s support to fund this through the Ford Foundation

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The post attributes a statement to Hardik Patel that a plan to discredit Modi involved spreading violence, with Kejriwal arranging money from the Ford Foundation. FACTLY examined the purported Dainik Jagran news clip and concluded that Patel had not made the statement. It describes the clip as a 2013 e-paper item whose headline had been changed. [S1: “A news clip purportedly of ‘Dainik Jagran’ is shared on social media claiming that Hardik Patel has made the statement – ‘The plan was to discredit Modi by spreading violence across the country, Kejriwal used to arrange money from Ford Foundation’.”; “Hardik Patel hasn’t made any such statement. The ‘Dainik Jagran’ epaper clip from 2013 is morphed and edited with a different title.”] The review reports that its search for Patel making the alleged statement found no relevant results. It also compared the clip’s content with search results for the e-paper URL and article text: those results showed a different headline, about 150 Muslim families accepting Hinduism. FACTLY says the article’s content concerned religious conversion in the presence of Badrinath Dham’s Shankaracharya, rather than the alleged political statement. [S1: “When searched if Hardik Patel ever made such a statement about spreading violence in the country to discredit Modi, no relevant results were found. Also, the content in the article talks about the religious conversion of 150 Muslim families in the presence of Badrinath Dham’s Shankaracharya.”; “The image found on ‘World Hindu News’ has the headline ‘150 मुस्लिम परिवार हिंदू धर्म में शामिल’.”] FACTLY’s account therefore identifies the central problem as altered media: the circulated image used the URL of a Dainik Jagran article but replaced its headline with text presenting the claim about Patel, Modi and Kejriwal. The review traces the original Dainik Jagran story to 24 December 2013 and describes it as an article about conversion of 150 Muslim families. [S1: “The image shared also has an epaper URL of Dainik Jagaran’s article, which is currently not available. But when searched with relevant keywords from the content and by applying time filter, search results with the same URL and content, but with a different headline were found.”; “the original story published by Dainik Jagaran was also found.”; “an article published by Dainik Jagran on 24 December 2013, about conversion of 150 Muslim families into Hindu religion, is edited to claim that Hardik Patel accepting his plan to discredit Modi by spreading violence in the country, and Kejriwal’s support to fund this through the Ford Foundation.”]

Fact CrescendoPolitics & government

Claim: Woman IPS officer condemning Modi

Publisher’s rating: False

The claim concerned a social-media post that described the woman in a photograph as a female IPS officer who had taken a stand against Prime Minister Modi. The review says the post asked people to support her and notes that it circulated on Facebook. Its investigation identified the woman in the image as TV actress Nilani, not an IPS officer: she had appeared in a television serial wearing a police uniform, and later released a video in that costume speaking about the police uniform. The review places the image in the aftermath of the Thoothukudi police firing. It reports that Nilani’s video drew attention and that some people initially celebrated her as a woman police officer opposing the Tamil Nadu police, before her identity as a TV serial actress became known. The review says BJP members complained to police about her and that Vadapalani police registered a case against her under four provisions, including impersonation and misuse of technology. These details explain how a performance in costume could be mistaken for evidence of an actual officer’s political stance. To check the specific allegation about Modi, the review says it searched for information showing that a female IPS officer had recently—or at any time—expressed opposition to him, but found none. It concludes that the image showed Nilani and that the post’s description of her as a woman IPS officer opposing Modi was false. The excerpt does not identify a particular real IPS officer or provide independent documentation of the search, so the conclusion here is limited to the review’s stated identification and search findings.