Media literacy
Manipulation is common and learnable to spot. This page explains the techniques, shows real catalogued cases, and gives you a checklist for checking any claim yourself.
How manipulation works
The seven techniques below cover most of what circulates as political disinformation. Each is illustrated by a real case in this database.
1. Fabricated quote
What it is: A politician is given words they never said — written or spoken by someone else and circulated as a direct quote.
The tell
No primary source (interview, speech, official transcript) links to the exact words. The quote is found only in secondary shares.
Real cases in this database: mr-047 (Esken / AfD-Verbot), mr-048 (Esken / Magdeburg), mr-043 (Scholz / Time-Interview), mr-044 (Scholz / Mauer-Zitat), mr-029 (Weidel / Witwenrente) — See catalogued case
2. Manipulated screenshot
What it is: A real post or document is digitally altered — one word changed, a number swapped — and recirculated as if authentic.
The tell
Font weight, pixel density, or kerning differs from surrounding text. Reverse-image search finds the original.
Real case in this database: mr-049 (Kühnert / "Rechtssexuelle") — See catalogued case
3. Deceptive framing / headline-body divergence
What it is: The headline asserts something the article text contradicts or qualifies. A technically true quote is placed in a context that reverses its meaning.
The tell
Read the full article. The headline claim often disappears or is hedged two paragraphs in.
Real case in this database: mr-150 (Habeck / "kein Bedauern" — ZEIT-Interview reversed by Bild) — See catalogued case
4. Out-of-context real footage
What it is: Authentic video or audio from one event is presented as evidence of something that happened at a different event.
The tell
Metadata (upload date, original channel) and reverse video search locate the true source.
Real case in this database: mr-062 (stadium-chant audio overlay for Die Linke) — See catalogued case
5. Fake agency dispatch
What it is: A fabricated headline or breaking-news post is formatted to look like a wire-agency report (dpa, Reuters, AFP) to borrow credibility.
The tell
Check the agency's own website and verified social accounts. Real dispatches are cited by multiple established outlets within minutes.
Real case in this database: mr-034 (fabricated dpa dispatch / Merz Innenministerium) — See catalogued case
6. Cloned news site / state information operation
What it is: A website mimics the visual identity of a real news brand. Content looks credible but is fabricated or altered. State-backed operations run these at scale.
The tell
Check the URL carefully. Real outlet URLs are well-known. Attribution by government agencies or security researchers identifies state-sponsored campaigns.
Real cases in this database: mr-006 (Doppelgänger / fake FAZ, Spiegel, Welt, SZ clones), mr-045 (Doppelgänger / Russian campaign against SPD-led government) — See catalogued case
7. AI-generated voice or video
What it is: A synthetic voice or video portrays a politician saying or doing something they did not. These can be nearly indistinguishable from real recordings.
The tell
Unnatural blinking or lip sync; metadata showing AI tools; no corroborating real-world coverage. Specialist tools and assessors can confirm.
Real cases in this database: mr-035 (Storm-1516 / Merz deepfake psychiatrist), mr-088 (Storm-1516 / Faber deepfake ex-staffer), mr-072 (AI-voice YouTube / Wagenknecht AfD defection), mr-082 (AI-voice YouTube / Rheinland-Pfalz Neuwahl claim) — See catalogued case
How to check a claim yourself
This six-step checklist works for almost any political claim you encounter.
- Find the primary source. Quotes should link to the original interview, speech, or document. If only secondary sources cite the quote, that is a warning sign.
- Check the date. Old events recycled as current news are a common technique. Verify when the original happened.
- Has a fact-checker or court already assessed this? Search the specialist organisations below. A finding already exists for many viral claims.
- Distinguish quote from paraphrase. Quotation marks in a headline do not always mean a verbatim quote. Check whether it is a summary interpretation of what was said.
- Separate opinion from reporting. Editorials, columns, and commentary are opinion. News reporting carries a different standard of verification. Many outlets mix both.
- Check whether a correction was issued. Established outlets publish corrections. If a story has been corrected, the retraction matters as much as the original claim.
Organisations to search
These are the assessors this database relies on. You can search them directly for any claim:
- CORRECTIV Faktencheck — Germany
- dpa-Faktencheck — Germany
- Mimikama — Austria
- Deutscher Presserat — Germany press council
- APA-Faktencheck — Austria
- Lakmusz — Hungary
Facts for your decision
Before deciding what to believe about a party or politician, check what is verifiably documented. The records below are sourced from official parliamentary data.
A claim being about a party tells you nothing about whether it is true. Check actual voting records rather than viral claims.
Landmark cases in the record
A curated chronological selection of the most consequential documented cases: fabrications, formal adjudications, and court rulings. Each entry is sourced to a named assessor.
Selection is a judgement call — criteria:
- Independent adjudication exists (court ruling, Presserat Rüge, official correction/retraction, or a major documented fact-check).
- The claim achieved significant public circulation, OR the adjudication was itself significant (e.g. a precedent-setting ruling).
- The outcome is documented (what the outlet did afterwards: corrected, retracted, refused).
Considered but excluded (3)
- Presserat Hinweise (lower-tier notices) for minor inaccuracies across multiple outlets — Hinweise do not meet the adjudication threshold — they are advisory notices without publication requirement; the public circulation of the underlying claims was also typically low.
- Unverified viral claims debunked by fact-checkers but never published by any established outlet — Rule 3 (documented outcome including what the outlet did afterwards) cannot be satisfied when no outlet published the claim. Platform-distributed false content without an outlet originator belongs in the information operations layer, not the journalism accountability timeline.
- LG Berlin II (Az. 27 O 379/25) partial injunction against CORRECTIV Potsdam reporting (mr-022) — Not final — CORRECTIV is in appeal and LG Hamburg 19.12.2025 reached the opposite conclusion on the main-action claims (mr-030). Including a non-final first-instance ruling in isolation would misrepresent the legal status; included instead via cross-references in lc-010 and lc-011.
Relotius scandal: reporter fabricated at least 14 articles
Star reporter Claas Relotius, CNN Journalist of the Year, was found by Der Spiegel's own investigation to have fabricated stories on a grand scale over several years, including invented characters and scenes. At least 14 of approximately 60 articles were affected. He resigned and returned four Reporterpreis awards; CNN stripped two. Spiegel published a three-member commission report and created an ombudsman's office. This is a fabrication case, not a partisan one — no party was targeted. The strongest media self-correction in modern German journalism came from the outlet itself — evidence against a blanket 'media are corrupt' narrative.
Rüge 0299/24/4 — Green local politician, Holocaust trivialisation reporting without right of reply
Bild reported a Green local politician was suspected of Holocaust trivialisation without giving him any opportunity to respond (Ziffer 2 Pressekodex). The Presserat ruled this a severe violation of journalistic diligence.
Rüge 1190/24/1 — Özoğuz Palestinian-flag fabrication
Bild claimed SPD Bundestag vice-president Aydan Özoğuz chose a LinkedIn profile photo showing Palestinian flag colours. She was standing in front of a German flag; no Palestinian flag was present. Presserat: 'massive violations' of Ziffer 1 (truthfulness) and Ziffer 2 (diligence). One of five Rügen issued against Bild in that session.
Rüge 0809/24/2 — Lang 'Bürgergeld-Satz' fabricated quote
Bild attributed to Green party co-leader Ricarda Lang a statement she did not make about Bürgergeld payment levels. Presserat found a severe breach of Ziffer 2 (diligence).
Rüge 0244/25/1 — '551 Fragen' Bürgergeld reporting
Outlet reported on a '551 questions' document relating to Bürgergeld policy in a manner the Presserat found to breach journalistic diligence (Ziffer 2 Pressekodex) — claims were presented as fact without sufficient verification.
Rüge 0248/25/1 — NGO financing misreporting
Outlet reported on NGO financing in a manner found to breach Ziffer 2 (diligence): claims about NGO funding chains were presented as established fact without adequate verification of the underlying documentation.
LG Hamburg 324 O 2/25 — Gelbhaar harassment reporting overturned
RBB reported sexual-harassment allegations against Green MdB Stefan Gelbhaar based centrally on a witness whose identity was never verified. The Hamburg Regional Court barred RBB from repeating core claims, finding the requirements for lawful Verdachtsberichterstattung were not met. RBB retracted parts of its coverage, paid a six-figure settlement, and both chief editors resigned. Gelbhaar had lost his candidacy because of the reporting.
VG Berlin 2 K 302/22 — BMWK forced to release Atomausstieg files (reporting upheld)
Cicero had been fighting the Federal Economy Ministry (BMWK) for over 18 months for access to internal documents about the 2022 nuclear phase-out decision. The Berlin Administrative Court ruled the secrecy unlawful under the Umweltinformationsgesetz and forced release of the documents, which confirmed that expert assessments had been sidelined. The ruling enabled grounded investigative reporting and a Bundestag Untersuchungsausschuss. The party-side pushback against the reporting failed in court.
LG Hamburg 324 O 129/24 — NIUS 'Green party police' injunction
NIUS claimed the Greens were building 'their own police' via the association PolizeiGrün, operating from party headquarters. The Hamburg Regional Court issued an injunction requiring deletion of the headline and of the factual claim that PolizeiGrün operated from the Green party headquarters. The factual core — a party-run police — was found untrue.
OLG Hamburg 7 W 78/24 — Potsdam meeting / Vosgerau: 'Ausweisung von Staatsbürgern' barred
OLG Hamburg (Beschluss 23.07.2024, Az. 7 W 78/24) barred by interim injunction the formulation that participant Ulrich Vosgerau had discussed the 'Ausweisung von Staatsbürgern' at the Potsdam meeting — in that specific form a false statement of fact; Vosgerau was identifiable via hyperlink. CORRECTIV itself subsequently clarified that participants had not discussed 'rechtswidrige Deportation' of German citizens.
LG Hamburg 324 O 439/24 — Potsdam meeting / Vosgerau: ZDF formulation barred
LG Hamburg (einstweilige Verfügung Okt. 2024, Az. 324 O 439/24, Antragsteller Vosgerau) found the ZDF formulation a false statement of fact. ZDF removed the report from its Mediathek. Contrast with LG Hamburg 19.12.2025 (Az. 324 O 6/25 and 324 O 7/25), which dismissed main-action claims against the core CORRECTIV reporting (mr-030).
Fabricated BVerfG ruling with invented Weidel quote (AfD-favouring fabrication)
A fabricated Bundesverfassungsgericht ruling dated 25 July 2025, including a wholly invented Weidel quote ('Sieg für den Rechtsstaat'), was circulated on social media. No such ruling exists. Documented by dpa-Faktencheck (29 July 2025). This is an AfD-favouring fabrication — fabrications run in both directions and the pattern is not the exclusive domain of any one political camp.
Fabricated Weidel quote: abolishing widow's pension (anti-AfD fabrication; also attributed to Baerbock)
A fabricated quote attributing plans to abolish the widow's pension was circulated under Weidel's name — the same fabricated quote had previously circulated attributed to Baerbock. CORRECTIV-Faktencheck (27 October 2023): quote entirely invented, said by neither Weidel nor Baerbock. This is an anti-AfD fabrication, standing alongside mr-028 (pro-AfD fabrication). Fabrications run in both directions.
NIUS publishes fabricated dpa dispatch one day after Bundestagswahl
NIUS published a story citing a dpa wire dispatch claiming Merz had agreed to give the SPD the interior ministry. No such dpa dispatch existed; dpa's editor-in-chief publicly denied it and Merz called it a 'fabricated news item'. NIUS deleted the article; Junge Freiheit, which had republished it, issued an apology. CORRECTIV rated it false.
Correction log
Every correction, amendment, or removal this site has made to Media Watch entries, with date, reason, and source. Public accountability requires showing when we get things wrong.
| Date | Case | What changed | Why | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-07-11 | hu-mr-012 | Assessment corrected: claim_effect changed from positive to harms; tone note updated | M1 apology attributed to Fidesz-era state propaganda and broadcast suspension; the event is negative for the previous Fidesz government, not positive. | PR-08 correction review, 2026-07-11 |
| 2026-07-12 | mr-151, mr-120, mr-149 | Dedup: mr-151 merged into mr-128, mr-120 into mr-076, mr-149 into mr-131 | Three duplicate entries found in programmatic dedup pass (PR-02). Canonical record retained; duplicates marked superseded. | data/media_reports/dedup_report.md, 2026-07-12 |
| 2026-07-11 | mr-128, mr-129, mr-141, mr-092, mr-094, mr-130, mr-144, hu-mr-022, hu-mr-027 | Nine DE/HU summaries de-editorialized | PR-04 voice audit found unattributed political labels and motive language in site voice. Replaced with attributed phrasing or removed. | data/media_reports/voice_audit.md, 2026-07-11 |