Skip to content
Fact-checking center Central Communications Service

Practical verification

Check before you share

These helpers reveal technical signals and organize a verification plan. They do not issue an automatic verdict or replace primary sources.

Processed locally. Links, text and files are not uploaded by these tools.

Who needs what

Use the tools as a workbench, not as an oracle

The same claim is read differently by an analyst, reporter, editor, lawyer and public officer. Start with the artefact each role needs.

Analyst Pattern and recurrence

Needs source, date, topic, repeated wording and exportable records for a short situation note.

Journalist Publish or hold

Needs a clean claim, primary source route, media checks and a wording that does not amplify the rumour.

Editor Evidence and uncertainty

Needs a reproducible checklist, source hierarchy and a verdict that separates fact, context and assumption.

Lawyer Risk wording

Needs neutral language, preserved source context and a visible boundary between finding and allegation.

Public officer Response without escalation

Needs a short brief, confirmed links, escalation status and a safe answer for citizens or a press office.

01

Search published checks

Start with a name, quotation, organization or a distinctive fragment of the claim.

03Inspect an imageFormat, dimensions and SHA-256 fingerprint
For visual matches, continue in a specialist service:Google Lens ↗Yandex Images ↗TinEye ↗
04Build a claim-check planTurn a message into a reproducible checklist

Editorial boundary

A signal is not a verdict

A reliable conclusion requires the original claim, date and context, at least one primary source and an explicit account of uncertainty.

Open verification guide