Bi-weekly Fact Check Intelligence Report

2026-01-26 — 2026-02-09
14-day period
Reports: Bi-weekly Monthly Year to date

A data-driven overview of worldwide fact-checked claims, analyzed by debunking organizations during this reporting period. This sample of 460 claims gives you an idea of what's out there: top claim type is fabricated text claim, top method no ai involved, top subject political figures, top intent political manipulation, average severity 3.0/5, with 115 AI-involved and 345 non-AI misinformation claims.

What the data tells us

About 1 in 4 claims (25%) involves AI-generated or AI-manipulated content.

Claim volume is down 46% compared to the previous period (857 → 460).

AI-involved claims dropped 53% compared to the previous period.

16 claims rated severity 5 (critical) — these have potential for serious real-world harm including inciting violence or influencing elections.

The three most common claim types: fabricated text claim (25%), out of context media (17%), ai generated image (13%).

Among AI-involved claims, full ai generation is the most common technique at 76% of AI cases (87 claims).

Most targeted regions: south asia (184), north america (98), southeast asia (40).

The primary motivation behind misinformation is political manipulation (49%), followed by engagement bait (12%).

Misinformation this bi-weekly period overwhelmingly targets outrage (50% of claims) — a deliberate strategy to bypass critical thinking.

Total Claims Analyzed
460
across 14 days
Average Severity
3.0
out of 5.0
AI-Involved
115
claims using AI tools
Non-AI Misinfo
345
traditional misinformation
Top Claim Type
Fabricated Text Claim
most common category
Top Method
No Ai Involved
most common technique
Top Subject
Political Figures
most targeted topic
Top Intent
Political Manipulation
most common motivation

Severity Distribution

How severe is the misinformation being circulated? Level 1 is low-impact, level 5 is high-impact disinformation with potential for serious real-world harm.

25
claims
Level 1
Low Impact
76
claims
Level 2
Minor
224
claims
Level 3
Moderate
119
claims
Level 4
Serious
16
claims
Level 5
Critical

Statistical Analysis

By Claim Type

What kind of misinformation is it? Click to filter claims.

Fabricated Text Claim 116
Out Of Context Media 80
Ai Generated Image 60
Old Media New Context 47
Manipulated Image 35
Ai Generated Video 27
Fake Screenshot 17
Misleading Statistic 17
Satire As News 17
Deepfake Video 10
Misattributed Quote 9
Conspiracy Theory 6
Miscaptioned 1

By AI Generation Method

Of the 115 AI-involved claims, which techniques were used? Click to filter. 345 claims used no AI.

Full Ai Generation 87
Screenshot Fabrication 17
Ai Editing Inpainting 16
Face Swap Deepfake 10
Composite Collage 4
Text Label Manipulation 3
Ai Enhancement 3

By Subject Category

Who or what is being targeted? Click to filter claims.

Political Figures 194
Crime Justice 37
Celebrity Entertainment 33
Religious Ethnic 29
Law Enforcement 22
Military Conflict 20
Disaster Emergency 19
Health Science 19
Protest Social Unrest 19
Business Corporate 17
Immigration 11
Wildlife Nature 6
Technology 3
Conspiracy Theory 1
Sports 1
Historical Fabrication 1

By Likely Intent

Why were these fakes created? Click to filter claims.

Political Manipulation 225
Engagement Bait 55
Outrage Division 51
Disinformation Campaign 28
Fear Mongering 25
Satire Humor 21
Emotional Manipulation 18
Scam Fraud 12
Conspiracy Theory 6
Misinformation Campaign 2
Cultural Exploitation 1
Sympathy 1
Propaganda 1

By Geographic Target

Where are these fakes aimed? Click to filter claims.

South Asia 184
North America 98
Global 85
Southeast Asia 40
Europe 18
Africa 10
Oceania 9
Middle East 6
Latin America 1
East Asia 1

By Debunking Method

How were these fakes identified?

Source Verification 291
Visual Artifact Analysis 71
Ai Detection Tools 30
Reverse Image Search 20
Expert Consultation 19
Data Fact Check 12
Official Records 9
Contextual Impossibility 6
Multiple Methods 2

By Platform

Where were these fakes distributed? 374 claims spread across multiple or unidentified platforms.

Facebook 49
X Twitter 31
Instagram 3
Tiktok 3

How advanced is the deception?

Sophistication of misinformation ranges from crude fabrication to highly polished, AI-enhanced content designed to evade detection.

Low 254
Medium 175
High 31

Which emotions are exploited?

Misinformation is designed to trigger specific emotional responses. Understanding the emotional vector reveals the strategy behind the deception.

Outrage
229
Fear
59
Humor
34
Sympathy
27
Disgust
23
Admiration
18
Grief
15
Hope
10
Patriotism
7

Where This Data Comes From

This report aggregates fact-checked claims from 30 independent fact-checking organizations worldwide via the Google Fact Check Tools API. These organizations are signatories of the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) code of principles and follow transparent verification methodologies. Claims cover all types of misinformation — not just AI-generated images, but also false text claims, conspiracy theories, misleading statistics, out-of-context media, and more.

Snopes
65 claims reviewed
65
AFP Fact Check
52 claims reviewed
52
Lead Stories
50 claims reviewed
50
News Mobile
35 claims reviewed
35
FACTLY
35 claims reviewed
35
The Quint
30 claims reviewed
30
Press Trust of India
26 claims reviewed
26
Rappler
24 claims reviewed
24
Newschecker
21 claims reviewed
21
BOOM Fact Check
18 claims reviewed
18
DigitEye India
16 claims reviewed
16
Full Fact
15 claims reviewed
15
Rumor Scanner
13 claims reviewed
13
AAP
9 claims reviewed
9
VERA Files
8 claims reviewed
8
Unknown
7 claims reviewed
7
Alt News
5 claims reviewed
5
India Today
4 claims reviewed
4
PolitiFact
4 claims reviewed
4
StopFake
4 claims reviewed
4
Lighthouse Journalism
3 claims reviewed
3
FactCheckHub
3 claims reviewed
3
PTI News
2 claims reviewed
2
FactCheck.org
2 claims reviewed
2
Medical Dialogues
2 claims reviewed
2
Science Feedback
2 claims reviewed
2
Fact Crescendo Sri Lanka
2 claims reviewed
2
THIP Media
1 claim reviewed
1
Australian Associated Press
1 claim reviewed
1
DW.com
1 claim reviewed
1

How claims are collected: The Google Fact Check API indexes claims from fact-checking organizations that publish ClaimReview structured data. We query the API with broad search terms to capture all available fact-checks from the reporting period. Each claim is then categorized using Gemini AI by type, method, subject, intent, geographic target, severity, sophistication, and emotional vector.

All 460 Analyzed Claims

Every fact-checked claim from this period, ranked by severity. Click any tag to filter by category.

Filtered by:

Previous Bi-weekly Reports

(AD) Do you want Henk van Ess to visit your company for a brilliant workshop?

About This Report

Data Source

Claims are sourced from the Google Fact Check Tools API, which indexes fact-check articles from IFCN-certified organizations worldwide. The API is query-based — there is no way to retrieve a complete list of all fact-checked claims. To maximize coverage, we run 75 different search queries (broad terms like "fact check", "viral", "fake"; topic-specific terms like "election", "health", "deepfake"; regional terms like "India", "Africa", "Brazil"; and platform names like "Facebook", "TikTok", "WhatsApp"), each returning up to 100 results with pagination. This yields a large sample but is not a complete census of all fact-checked content published in the period.

Multi-Reviewer Claims

When the same claim was reviewed by multiple fact-checking organizations, all reviewers are shown on that claim's card. Claims are merged by matching claim text, so a story checked by e.g. Snopes, PolitiFact, and AFP Fact Check appears once with all three linked. The number of claims in this report therefore represents unique stories, not unique articles.

Classification

Each claim is categorized by type, generation method, subject, intent, geographic target, severity (1–5), sophistication, and emotional vector using Gemini 2.0 Flash AI classification. Severity ratings reflect potential real-world impact (1 = quickly debunked satire, 5 = could incite violence or influence elections). This report covers all types of misinformation — AI-generated images, deepfakes, false text claims, conspiracy theories, misleading statistics, out-of-context media, fabricated quotes, fake screenshots, and more.

Limitations

Because the Google Fact Check API requires search terms, claims that do not match any of our query terms will not appear. English-language results are prioritized (languageCode=en). The sample skews toward claims that use common misinformation-related vocabulary. Regional coverage depends on whether local fact-checkers publish in English and are indexed by Google. AI classification may occasionally miscategorize edge cases.

Data from 30 fact-checking organizations
Report generated 2026-02-09 covering 14 days