Por Andrés Jiménez

Read in English

El tabloide británico Sunday Express aseguró en un artículo publicado el pasado 12 de mayo que la UE había aceptado investigar las acciones policiales llevadas a cabo por la policía española en el referéndum de independencia de Cataluña. Los distintos cuerpos fueron acusados de hacer un uso desproporcionado de la fuerza durante la votación de aquel 1 de octubre de 2017, que fue declarada ilegal por el Tribunal Constitucional.

La Comisión Europea dijo entonces en un comunicado que “la violencia nunca puede ser un instrumento en política”, y que el referéndum era “un asunto interno de España, que hay que abordar de conformidad con el ordenamiento constitucional”.

El Sunday Express publicó que la Comisión había decidido intervenir para comprobar si tanto el Gobierno como la policía habían cometido alguna irregularidad.

“Ocho meses después de que Cataluña celebrase el referendum para independizarse de España, la Unión Europea ha aceptado al fin examinar las agresiones del gobierno de Madrid durante las semanas posteriores a la importante votación”

El artículo, que fue ampliamente compartido en los sectores independentistas, hace referencia a un intercambio de cartas entre la oficina del presidente de la Comisión Europea, Jean-Claude Juncker, y el presidente de la Alianza Libre Europea (ALE), François Alfonsi, quien en una primera correspondencia solicitó a la UE que exigiese a España el cese de sus “acciones represivas”.

Según el Sunday Express, el órgano ejecutivo liderado por Juncker había aceptado la petición, pero una copia de la carta obtenida por Facterbot lo desmiente.

Como puedes ver, la carta enviada por el equipo de Juncker no acepta en ningún momento “intervenir tras la ‘brutalidad’ de la policía española”, como asegura el tabloide británico. Simplemente informa a la ALE de que han “tomado nota” de sus peticiones.

Además, tampoco se dice que la UE o la CE como tal vayan a examinar la solicitud de la coalición regionalista, sino que la encargada de hacerlo será la comisaria de Justicia, Vera Jourová.

La ALE tacha de “engañoso” el artículo del Sunday Express

En un comunicado enviado a Facterbot, la Alianza Libre Europea dijo que algunas partes del texto son engañosas, como la frase “la Unión Europea ha aceptado al fin examinar las agresiones del gobierno de Madrid”.

El representante de ALE admitió que, en su opinión, “hubo represión y violencia” por parte del Ejecutivo, pero que en la carta enviada a las instituciones europeas no incluyeron las palabras ‘agresión’ o ‘violencia’. Estos términos tampoco aparecen en la respuesta de Juncker.

Tampoco dijeron que la policía española había usado “métodos crueles” para frenar la votación, una expresión que sí utiliza el Sunday Express.

Aquí puedes ver la primera carta enviada por la ALE:

Facterbot se puso en contacto con el periodista del Sunday Express, Daniel Falvey, para aclarar las incongruencias de su artículo, pero no ha respondido a la hora de publicar esta pieza.

El artículo del Sunday Times es engañoso por los siguientes motivos:

Recibe más historias como esta suscribiéndote a nuestro chatbot de Facebook Messenger. Aprende cómo con esta guía.

La UE no ha aceptado investigar la intervención policial en el referéndum catalán was originally published in Facterbot on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

By Andrés Jiménez

Leer en español

British tabloid Sunday Express published an article on May 12 claiming that the EU had agreed to investigate the intervention of Spanish police during the 2017 Catalan independence referendum. Back then, they were accused of using disproportionate force in order to stop the October 1 vote, which had been called illegal by the country’s constitutional court.

The European Commission said in a statement that “violence can never be an instrument in politics”, but considered the “not legal” vote had to be dealt “in line with the constitutional order of Spain.”

The Sunday Express reported that the Commission was now going to intervene to see if either the Spanish police or government had committed any wrongdoings.

“Eight months after Catalonia held a referendum into becoming independent from Spain, the European Union has finally agreed to look into aggression by the Madrid government in the weeks following the all-important vote.”

The article, which was widely echoed by pro-independence supporters, refers to a letter exchange between the cabinet of the European Commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, and the president of Europe Free Alliance (EFA), François Alfonsi, who in the first correspondence had urged the EU to demand Spain to “refrain from further repressive actions.”

According to the Sunday Express, the institution lead by Mr. Juncker had agreed to do so, but a copy of the letter obtained by Facterbot says otherwise.

As you can see, the letter submitted by Juncker’s team does not agree to “intervene in Spanish police ‘brutality’ ’’, as claimed by the British tabloid. It simply informs the EFA that they have “taken note” of their demands, and that they will look into “the points you have raised”.

Also, it doesn’t say that the EU or the EC as a whole will examine the regionalist coalition’s concerns, but refers the task to Justice commissioner Vera Jourová.

The EFA says Sunday Express’ report is “misleading”

The Europe Free Alliance told Facterbot in a statement that some parts of the article were misleading, such as the quote “the European Union has finally agreed to look into aggression by the Madrid government in the weeks following the all-important vote.”

The representative of the EFA said that although they “do stand by the fact that there was violence and repression by the Madrid government”, the letter sent to the different EU institutions did not include the words ‘aggression’ or ‘violence’, nor did Juncker’s response.

They also didn’t say Spanish police used ‘vicious methods’ to stop the vote, an expression that is used by the Sunday Express.

Here you can see the first letter sent by the EFA:

Facterbot reached out to Daniel Falvey, the author of the Sunday Express report, to inquire about its inconsistencies. He hasn’t replied at the time of writing this piece.

Here’s why we deem the Sunday Express article as misleading:

You can reed more stories like this by subscribing to our Facebook Messenger chatbot. Learn how to with this simple user guide.

The EU has not agreed to investigate Spanish police for 'brutality' in Catalonia was originally published in Facterbot on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Many things have happened since I decided to start Facterbot last November. What started as an exciting side project is now a full-time commitment that many of you have found useful.

Facterbot has now over 100 subscribers, and over 40% of them interact every day with our Facebook Messenger stories. This is outstanding, as no other platform could provide such an opening rate.

One medium that does reach a similar average are newsletters. They used to be a simple commercial tool that most of the time got spammed, but they have now become a very valuable resource for news organizations.

At Facterbot we are always thinking of new ways of interacting with you, and we have decided that we are going to launch our very own newsletter.

Meet Double Check

Many of you have shown interest on how we fact-check our stories, and that is exactly what we are going to bring to you in every issue of the newsletter. You will be able to find out what goes on behind Facterbot and discover the whole process we follow before sending you our Facebook Messenger updates three times a week.

But collaboration is essential in journalism, so we are not going to focus Double Check exclusively on us. Instead, we are going to interview some of the best fact-checkers in the world and find out how they debunked a particular story.

We are specially interested in providing you an insight into the whole fact-checking process, and sharing some tips and tools that will help you verify your own stories.

It sounds cool, right?

If you want to be part of Double Check, you can do so for free by clicking on the subscribe button down below:

SUBSCRIBE

We really hope you enjoy it and that you spread the word if you do. Until then, remember you can keep up with our work by subscribing to our Facebook Messenger chatbot.

The Double Check newsletter was originally published in Facterbot on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

The Philadelphia Eagles lifted the Lombardi trophy for the first time last night after defeating the New England Patriots at Super Bowl LII by 41–33, and in the era of fake news, it was expected that there would be as many bogus stories as touchdowns.

These started late January, when Facebook page Satire Daily shared a video claiming that NFL commissioner Roger Goodell had admitted that some games had been rigged. The 6 minute long montage also shows players and referees recognizing the plot, but none of it is true.

The caption clearly says that the story is fabricated, but it incites users to share it in order to tease others. Many did, which has translated into over 30 million views.

The video, which was later shared on Twitter without the disclaimer, was only one of many false stories shared prior to the Super Bowl. Fake news site YourNewsWire reported that an NFL lawyer named Dan Goodes had been killed in New York City after revealing that yesterday’s clash between the Eagles and the Patriots was rigged.

“The 49-year-old was found shot dead in a 2017 BMW 2 Series, along with one other man, believed to be a close friend”, said the article. This happened after Mr Goodes allegedly had been “phisically removed” from an earlier promotional event involving staff from both contending teams, where he stated that the NFL was “totally corrupt” and that Sunday’s game was “fixed”.

Snopes fact-checked the allegations and found that no lawyer under the name of Dan Goodes had worked for the NFL, nor had died in New York City.

Facterbot also investigated the photo that was included alongside the article and discovered that it was actually taken in July 2017, and showed the scene where a New York City police officer had been shot.

You can reed more stories like this by subscribing to our Facebook Messenger chatbot. Learn how to with this simple user guide.

Fake news sites claim Super Bowl was rigged was originally published in Facterbot on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Andrés Jiménez

On Wednesday, several outlets including the Scottish Daily Mail, The Daily Telegraph and Scottish Daily Express reported that First Minister Nicola Sturgeon had banned the Union flag on royal occasions, such as the Queen’s birthday. It was a cover story in all three newspapers:

Government buildings would hoist the flag on Remembrance Day only, whilst prior to Sturgeon’s alleged decision it had done so 15 days per year. In replacement, the Lion Rampant would fly on all royal events.

This was referenced by Conservative leader Ruth Davidson, who tweeted that the SNP government led by Ms Sturgeon should be “more concerned with raising standards, not lowering flags”.

The Scottish First Minister used the same platform to show her outrage and clarify the incident. She said that although civil service had “recently decided to update the published guidance to accurately reflect the long-standing practice”, it had actually been established in 2010 under Alex Salmond’s government.

In a statement released on his personal website, Mr Salmond explained that the decision had been taken in consultation with the Queen, during an audience at Balmoral Castle in 2009. “It seemed obvious to me that the appropriate flag to be flown on the occasion of royal birthdays is the Royal Standard or The Lion Rampant”, he said.

The Daily Mail apologizes

On Friday’s issue, Scottish Daily Mail acknowledged the mistake and apologized to Nicola Sturgeon, who shared the message on Twitter. Here it is:

You can reed more stories like this by subscribing to our Facebook Messenger chatbot. Learn how to with this simple user guide.

Did Sturgeon ban the Union flag for the Queen’s birthday? was originally published in Facterbot on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Por Andrés Jiménez

No habían pasado ni cinco minutos desde el cierre de urnas y Elsa Artadi, coordinadora de la campaña de Junts per Catalunya, ya estaba frente a las cámaras para valorar la jornada electoral. Se mostró mucho más cauta que en su segunda intervención, cuando el escrutinio reveló que las fuerzas independentistas iban a volver a sumar mayoría.

Durante su discurso, Artadi lamentó que en algunos colegios electorales se hubiera intentado alterar los resultados, sin mencionar casos concretos. Algo que sí hizo en su cuenta de Twitter al compartir una noticia que informaba de un supuesto fraude en el colegio Pompeu Fabra de Reus.

El artículo asegura que el presidente de una de las mesas electorales entregó un sobre con una papeleta de Ciudadanos a un votante de avanzada edad, y que se encontraron otras tantas de la misma candidatura detrás de su asiento.

Según Reus Diari, varios apoderados llamaron a representantes de la Junta Electoral, y poco después se personaron agentes de los Mossos d’Esquadra para interrogar al hombre, a los vocales y a los interventores que estaban presentes. También cuentan que en el momento de escribir la noticia desconocían si se había levantado el acta o no.

Facterbot habló con Arnau Martínez, un periodista de Reus Digital que cubrió la jornada electoral en dicho colegio, que asegura que la votación se restableció con normalidad pese a que un agente de policía y un responsable de la administración estuvieron supervisando al individuo.

En declaraciones a este medio, la Junta Electoral de Reus afirmó que el incidente había sido “solucionado” al poco tiempo de producirse. Ocurrió alrededor de las 13:00, y fue compartido por Elsa Artadi horas después pese a que ya había sido aclarado.

Facterbot habló con un miembro de la redacción de Reus Diari para despejar algunas incongruencias de su artículo, pero rechazaron participar en esta investigación. Además, a esta hora siguen sin publicar una corrección con la versión real de lo ocurrido.

Los Mossos d’Esquadra, la Junta Electoral Central y la delegación de Ciudadanos en Reus también fueron contactados para colaborar con la investigación, pero aún no han dado respuesta. En caso de hacerlo, se incluirá en esta misma publicación.

Recibe más historias como esta suscribiéndote a nuestro chatbot de Facebook Messenger. Aprende cómo con esta guía.

El dudoso fraude electoral del 21D was originally published in Facterbot on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

By Andrés Jiménez

Alfred Nobel’s last will was to give out most of the wealth he had made during the years to the brightest minds in physics, chemistry, medicine, literature and peace. He did so by creating five different prizes, one for each of these categories.

The awards, which were named after him, have been going on since 1901 and are now recognized as one of the most prestigious distinctions anybody can ever earn. They unleash excitement and expectation every year, but also some controversy now and then.

On October 9, journalists gathered to find out who was the 2017 Economic Science prize winner, a category that was introduced in 1969. During the press conference, a reporter asked why so few women have won the Nobel.

We checked all the Nobel prize winners to see if that was the case, and here are our conclusions:

Yes, women are misrepresented

In total, there have been 923 laureates since the Nobel was first awarded. 847 of them were men, 27 others were organizations, and only 49 were women. If we put this into percentages, we would find that just under 92% of winners were male, whilst only 5% were held by the opposite sex. This is roughly 1 in 20 awards.

What about the science prizes?

The breach is even wider when it comes to the science categories –Physics, Chemistry and Physiology or Medicine–. If we focus on them, we will reduce the laureates to 599, of which only 18 were women (3%).

Marie Curie won the Physics Nobel prize in 1903, and the Chemistry one in 1911. That means that 17 different women have been distinguished with a scientific Nobel.

What are the solutions?

Göran Hansson, the vice chair of the board of directors of the Nobel Foundation, alleged he was disappointed with the fact that woman are highly misrepresented in the prizes.

He said that they have to go “back in time to identify discoveries”, and in the past there were “far fewer women scientists”. However, he hoped that “in five or ten years we will see a very different situation”.

Mr. Hansson also stated that, starting next year, they will make special efforts to nominate more women and ensure “ethnic and geographic diversity” whilst they are at it. Additionally, he insisted that all prize-giving committees have “female scientists”, and that three of the six are chaired by a woman.

Per Stromberg, the chairman of the Economic Sciences prize, concluded that “as time goes by, the fraction of women Nobel laureates will increase”.

We contacted the Nobel Prize organizers for further information, but got no reply. If they answer at any point, we will issue the feedback in another story.

You can reed more stories like this by subscribing to our Facebook Messenger chatbot. Learn how to with this simple user guide.

92% of Nobel prizes were won by men was originally published in Facterbot on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

By Andrés Jiménez

Investigative reporter Brian Ross was suspended for four weeks without pay after reporting that US President Donald Trump had directed Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser, to contact Russian officials during the 2016 campaign.

A confidant to Michael Flynn who provided Mr. Ross with the information later clarified that Trump had done so when he was president- elect, not candidate.

The correction was issued in a statement where the broadcaster apologized for the “serious error” committed by the senior reporter. They also admitted that the report “had not been fully vetted” through their editorial standards process.

At first, Trump congratulated ABC for the suspension of Mr. Ross, but he later threatened to sue the outlet “for the damages this bad reporting has caused”.

Although Dow Jones industrial average did plunge 350 points –it later recovered–, it is unlikely that Brian Ross’s reporting was the cause. However, this accusation was also thrown by Eric Trump, the president’s son.

Brian Ross joined ABC News over two decades ago, and he has experienced similar issues since then. In 2012, he incorrectly reported that the perpetrator of a mass shooting at a cinema in Aurora, Colorado, was a local Tea Party member who happened to be called the same way as the actual shooter.

Ari Fleischer, who served as press secretary during the George W. Bush administration, also recalled when Brian Ross inaccurately claimed that the iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein was behind the anthrax attacks carried out in the United States in 2001, shortly after 9/11.

Kathleen Culver, the director of the Center for Journalism Ethics told The new York Times that the mistake will benefit Donald Trump’s fake news campaign, aimed to undermine the credibility of news organizations who are critical with the administration.

You can reed more stories like this by subscribing to our Facebook Messenger chatbot. Learn how to with this simple user guide.

ABC suspends Brian Ross after erroneous report was originally published in Facterbot on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Han pasado varias semanas desde que empezamos a contaros nuestras historias a través de Facebook Messenger, y no podríamos estar más contentos. En primer lugar porque el feedback que nos habéis dado hasta el momento está siendo positivo: no sólo sois cada vez más los que interactuáis con nuestro querido bot, sino que además parece que os está gustando la experiencia.

Cuando lanzamos Facterbot nos prometimos que iba a ser un producto periodístico abierto a cualquier forma de innovación. Hay miles de maneras de contar historias a día de hoy, y queremos saber cuáles os gustan más.

Para ello, hace una semana lanzamos una encuesta en la que os hicimos varias preguntas. La mayoría de ellas giraban en torno a vuestra relación con el mundo del periodismo y los chatbots, pero también os planteamos algunas de carácter más personal para poder optimizar nuestro producto.

El 55% elegisteis el español como lengua materna, así que le hemos dado un curso intensivo al bot y ya está listo para atenderos en vuestro idioma predilecto. Simplemente deberéis pinchar sobre el botón de ‘Sí, en español’ que veréis en el mensaje inicial.

Esto es tan nuestro como vuestro, así que si tenéis alguna duda, consejo o queja os rogamos que nos la hagáis llegar a cualquiera de nuestras redes sociales o a facterbot@gmail.com.

Facterbot es un chatbot de Facebook Messenger que te ayuda a saber si lo que estás leyendo es cierto o no.

Habla con Facterbot en español was originally published in Facterbot on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Alt-right activists have falsely claimed that Devin Patrick Kelley, the man who killed 26 people at the First Babtist Church in Sutherland Springs just over a week ago, was an Antifa member and wanted to start a civil war in the United States.

By Andrés Jiménez

A 26 year old man named David Patrick Kelley killed 26 people and injured 20 others who were attending Sunday service at the First Babtist Church in Sutherland Springs, a small Texan town close to San Antonio.

Although the exact motive is yet unknown, the spokesman for the Texas Department of Public Safety, Freeman Martin, confirmed that it was due to a family dispute and not because of any religious or racial beliefs. But the alt-right insisted that the attacker was an Antifa member through tweets by some of their leaders and numerous propagandistic blogs such as ThirdEstateNewsGroup or YourNewsWire.

They alleged that Mr. Kelley “vowed to start a civil war by targeting conservative churches and causing anarchy in the United States”, and that he was carrying an Antifa flag during the attack. They also said that the gunman shouted “this is a communist revolution” whilst shooting his semi-automatic rifle.

These false statements were shared by some leaders of the far right movement the likes of Mike Cernovich or Infowars host Alex Jones, who each had hundreds of retweets.

However, fact-checking website Politifact found not only that Devin Patrick Kelley hadn’t waved an Antifa flag, but that the image shown by alt-righters was actually a screenshot of one that appeared on the leftist group’s shop.

The article published in YourNewsWire also includes a screenshot of a conversation between two people who claim tha attack was carried out by two perpetrators –Mr. Kelley was the only gunman that day– who made some of the service attendants read out extracts from a copy of Das Kapital, by Karl Marx.

The conversation, of course, had no attribution.

You can reed more stories like this by subscribing to our Facebook Messenger chatbot. Learn how to with this simple user guide.

.

Sutherland Springs Gunman wasn’t Antifa was originally published in Facterbot on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.