YaCy + IPFS: Децентрализированный поиск для децентрализованного интернета

 ### Post-ironic essay: "Sindoor, facts and the world circus"

So, while the world is watching the second season of Operation Sindoor live, we are sitting with popcorn and trying to understand: where are the facts, and where is another script from global showrunners? India is hitting Pakistan, Pakistan is hitting back, and somewhere in the shadows China is rubbing its hands as if preparing its “oxygen” spoiler. RAND warned back in 2018: facts are drowning in opinions, bloggers are defeating the NYT, and truth is like an awl in a bag, only now the bags are full of holes.

Let's take Sindoor. India shouts: "We kill the terrorists!" Pakistan: "You are killing our children!" Both sides post videos to X, and who's right? Fact checkers come into the chat, but you need to check them yourself. Your method - crossing a bunch of sources, throwing out propaganda and cobbling together a "synthetic fact" - sounds like trying to assemble a puzzle where half the pieces are from another box. And all this against the backdrop of Europe whining that Trump is draining their “soft power”, and the Chinese “rat people” scrolling social networks, not noticing how the world is heading towards a new season of “Geopolitical Crunch”.

What about Russia? Sits like a meme cat between India and Central Asia, trying not to drop a single plate. Kazakhstan is already leering, Uzbekistan is whispering, and India is waving Russian missiles. And somewhere in this chaos, Israel (may not have supplied bombs, but rumors are already circulating), and China (may not have made the “oxygen bomb,” but conspiracy theories are alive). Everything is like in the series “The Diplomat”: on the walls there are portraits of kings, and in the air there are hints of difficult circumstances.

So, friends, grab some popcorn, turn on your critical thinking and don’t trust anyone, not even yourself. The truth is somewhere nearby, but she, the infection, has already subscribed to the YouTube blogger and went into the sunset. 🍿

#Sindoor #FactCheckingCringe #Disintegration of Truth #IndiaPakistan #GlobalTrindent #ChinaWatching #RANDWasRight

---

### Fact-checking key statements

1. **The RAND "Truth Decay" Report and the Post-Information Age**  

   - **Claim**: The RAND report "The Decay of Truth" came out in 2019 and warned of a post-information era where the media is losing power and the lines between opinion and fact are blurring.  

   - **Check**: The report "Truth Decay: An Initial Exploration of the Diminishing Role of Facts and Analysis in American Public Life" was published by the RAND Corporation in **January 2018**, not 2019. It does describe the phenomenon of "truth decay", highlighting four key trends:  

     1. Growing disagreement with facts and their analytical interpretation.  

     2. Blurring the boundaries between opinion and fact.  

     3. Increasing the influence of opinions and personal experience over facts.  

     4. Declining trust in traditional sources of information (for example, the media).  

     The authors (Jennifer Kavanagh and Michael D. Rich) note that bloggers, social networks and alternative platforms (YouTube, X) reinforce this process, as they often mix facts with interpretations that are not subject to rigorous verification.  

   - **Conclusion**: The statement about the contents of the report is generally correct, but the publication date is 2018. The concept of the "post-information age" is not used directly in the report, but is implied through the description of the erosion of trust in facts.

2. **Media Fact Check (NYT, WSJ)**  

   - **Claim**: It is impossible to verify what The New York Times or The Wall Street Journal write.  

   - **Checking**: Fact-checking information from major media outlets is possible, but limited. Methods include:  

     - **Cross-checking sources**: Comparing data from multiple media outlets, official statements, documents, scientific reports, or primary sources (e.g., satellite imagery, recordings).  

     - **Independent Fact Checkers**: Organizations like PolitiFact, FactCheck.org or Bellingcat analyze media claims, although their independence is sometimes disputed.  

     - **Algorithmic analysis**: Using AI to identify inconsistencies in data (for example, analyzing texts for contradictions).  

     However, as the RAND report notes, the credibility of any source (including fact checkers) is undermined by ideological filters and subjectivity in interpretation. Your approach—synthesizing data from multiple sources with filtering of ideologically biased interpretations—is consistent with the methodology of critical analysis, although it is labor-intensive and does not always give an unambiguous result.  

   - **Conclusion**: It is possible to check the NYT or WSJ, but it requires access to alternative sources and a critical approach. Complete objectivity is unattainable due to “blurring of boundaries” (as stated by RAND).

3. **Operation Sindoor and the Indo-Pakistan conflict**  

   - **Claim**: India has launched Operation Sindoor against Pakistan, which is reminiscent of replacing the Russian-Ukrainian conflict with a new source of tension.  

   - **Check**:  

     - Operation Sindoor is a real event. India announced its start on May 6–7, 2025, launching missile attacks on 9 “terrorist infrastructure” facilities in Pakistan and its controlled Kashmir. The targets are the Jaish-e-Muhammad and Lashkar-e-Taiba groups. Pakistan responded with missile strikes and artillery fire, claiming the deaths of 26 civilians, including children.  

     - The conflict is related to the terrorist attack on April 22, 2025 in Pahalgam (Jammu and Kashmir), where 26 people, including tourists, were killed. India accuses Pakistan of supporting terrorists, Pakistan denies this.  

     - Escalation confirmed: Pakistan shot down several Indian fighters (including two Rafales), India reported three civilian deaths from Pakistani shelling.  

   - **Conclusion**: Operation Sindoor is a confirmed fact. The comparison with the Russian-Ukrainian conflict as a “replacement” is speculative, but the geopolitical context (China behind Pakistan, India as a partner of the Russian Federation) makes such a hypothesis plausible for analysis.

4. **Geopolitical speculation (China, Pakistan, India, Russia)**  

   - **Statement**: Pakistan supports China, India is an “aggressor,” and the conflict fuels anti-Muslim sentiment and spoils Russia’s relations with Central Asia.  

   - **Check**:  

     - **China and Pakistan**: Pakistan is a close ally of China (CPEC economic corridor, military cooperation). China may indirectly support Pakistan, but there is no direct evidence of intervention in the 2025 conflict.  

     - **India as an aggressor**: India positions itself as a fighter against terrorism, and Pakistan as a victim of aggression. Both sides use propaganda, which supports RAND's thesis about the blurring of facts and opinions.  

     - **Anti-Muslim narrative**: Escalation may increase tensions in the Muslim world, but there is no direct evidence of global mobilization “against infidels” yet. This is a hypothesis that requires observation.  

     - **RF and Central Asia**: Russia is India’s partner (supplying weapons), but also maintains relations with Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan. The India-Pakistan conflict could complicate the balance, especially if Kazakhstan increases its anti-Russian rhetoric, but this is still speculation.  

   - **Conclusion**: Hypotheses about the geopolitical game have grounds, but require additional data. Chinese support for Pakistan is likely, an anti-Muslim narrative is a possible scenario, but not a fact.

5. **Israeli ammunition and the Chinese "oxygen bomb"**  

   - **Claim**: Israel supplied India with precision-guided munitions in April 2025, and China tested a non-nuclear "hydrogen device" resembling an "oxygen bomb."  

   - **Check**:  

     - **Israeli supplies**: Information about Israeli supplies of ammunition to the Adampur air base (Daily Times) has not been confirmed by other sources. Israel and India are military partners, but specific deliveries in April 2025 require verification.  

     - **Chinese “bomb”**: The mention of testing a “hydrogen-based explosive device” (CSSC) is not confirmed in open sources. The concept of an "oxygen bomb" (thermobaric weapon) is real, but its use by the Wehrmacht or in Hiroshima/Nagasaki is a conspiracy theory without evidence. Thermobaric weapons burn oxygen, causing a massive explosion, but leave buildings "largely intact" - an exaggeration.  

   - **Conclusion**: Israeli supplies are unconfirmed information, the “oxygen bomb” is speculation with a conspiracy theory.

6. **Propaganda and “soft power”**  

   - **Claim**: The West is losing to Russia and China in the information war, and Trump, Lipavsky and Saragossa are concerned about the loss of “soft power.”  

   - **Check**:  

     - **Trump and propaganda**: Le Monde's statement about Trump calling US foreign broadcasting "useless" (March 14, year unknown) requires context. Trump has criticized the Voice of America and similar structures, but there are no direct quotes about “bureaucracy” in 2025.  

     - **Lipavsky and Saragossa**: Statements by the Czech minister and head of France Médias Monde about the importance of “soft power” and “independent media” reflect the real concern of the West about the loss of influence in the information sphere. This is consistent with the RAND report on the growing influence of alternative sources (Russia, China).  

     - **Propaganda**: The term "independent off-site media" may indeed mask propaganda, as RAND notes in its information warfare analysis.  

   - **Conclusion**: Western concerns are real, but specific quotes require verification. The thesis about losing the information war is confirmed by RAND.

7. **Series and cultural context**  

   - **Statement**: TV series on Kinopoisk.ru illustrate the problems of information warfare, espionage and the collapse of traditional structures.  

   - **Check**: The series mentioned ("The Diplomat", the spin-off "The Bureau", "The Watchful Neighbor", etc.) really touch on the topics of espionage, disinformation and hacking. They reflect public interest in these issues, but are not sources of fact. The "lip reading" episode (The Sun) is an example of media analysis, but neural networks for lip reading are not yet perfect and are not 100% accurate.  

   - **Conclusion**: TV series are a cultural product, not evidence. They reinforce the narratives described in RAND.

8. **Chinese Social Trends and the Five Eyes**  

   - **Statement**: Fraudulent marriages and the phenomenon of “rat people” are growing in China, and the United States has returned to the “Five Eyes” to counter the Russian Federation and China.  

   - **Check**:  

     - **China**: Fraudulent marriages and antisocial lifestyles (“rat people”) are mentioned in the South China Morning Post as social trends among young people. This confirms the erosion of traditional society, but is not directly related to conflict.  

     - **Five Eyes**: There is no evidence that the US "withdrew" from the "Five Eyes" or returned in 2025. The alliance remains active for intelligence sharing. The hypothesis about global reformatting (USA + RF vs. EU + PRC) is an interesting speculation, but without confirmation.  

   - **Conclusion**: Chinese trends are real, but their connection with geopolitics is speculative. The Five Eyes is an active alliance, and the reformatting of the world is a hypothesis.

---

### Answer to the question about verifying information

You asked how to verify information from major media outlets and suggested a method for synthesizing data. This approach is viable, but limited:  

- **Pros**: Comparing sources (e.g. Reuters, Geo TV, Ani) allows you to identify discrepancies and filter out obvious propaganda. Algorithms (such as topic modeling or sentiment analysis) can help automate the process.  

- **Disadvantages**: Even “sensible” sources can be biased. A complete picture requires access to primary data (eg satellite images, official reports), which is not always possible.  

- **Recommendation**: Use open databases (UN, World Bank), scientific reports and platforms like X to track narratives, but always cross-check them.