Fact Checkers – the Sepoys of South America
The Control of Information - how the rich ‘and powerful shape the media and control your mind. By Dr. Judith Brown
"Censorship is the tool of those who have the need to hide actualities from themselves and from others." Charles Bukowski
Argentina, Chile, Bolivia, Paraguay, and Uruguay.
The countries in the south of the South American continent are in a temperate zone; by far the largest of these countries is Argentina, the eighth biggest country in the world, its population mostly being of European descent. Chile, a narrow country to the west is very mountainous, it is situated between the Andes and the Pacific Ocean, it southern tip being the most southern country in the world. Bolivia and Paraguay are landlocked, and both have indigenous tribal populations, and mestizo – people with a mix of indigenous and European ancestry. Bolivia to the west has a varied landscape from high mountain ranges and plateaus to vast plains, whereas Paraguay consists mainly of plains and swamplands, and although it is landlocked it has access to the Atlantic Ocean via a river system. Uruguay is situated between Brazil and Argentina, with its eastern shore facing the Atlantic Ocean, and has a population mainly of European descent. These five countries all are Spanish speaking, although some people of Bolivia and Paraguay still speak in indigenous languages, and parts of their populations still adhere to tribal customs. These countries were all colonised by Spain, but they gained independence in the early nineteenth century. Much of the region is Christian, especially Catholic, and all of these countries are ruled by some form of democracy. As they are independent countries, they have varied forms of legislation to control information and digital services.
Argentina.
Argentina, the largest, most populous and dominant country in the region, is like Brazil a federal state with a representative democracy, and the President is also head of the government. Currently it has a president, Javier Milei described as right wing and populist; he is an economist described as having a flamboyant personality. According to the American establishment organisation PEN, censorship has increased since the start of his presidency [1] here. As with Bolsonaro in Brazil, there will inevitably be conflict between a president who has populist views, and a media that is committed to woke ideals. The struggle between ‘woke’ and ‘populist’ was covered in detail in the report of censorship in Brazil, which can be found here [2] here.
Chile.
Chile is also moving towards the ‘new’ political right. Its current president, Gabriel Boric, is of the left, a student activist from the days of the military dictator Pinochet. In several referendums the Chilean people have rejected a proposed new constitution, preferring an adaption of a constitution that was written during the rule of Pinochet. In 2025 there will be an election, and forerunners for the presidency are from right leaning populist leaders [3] here.
Bolivia.
Bolivia is the poorest country in the southern part of South America, but with gas and lithium reserves. It is described as being in a state of political turmoil since 2019. Until this period, it had a long-standing president, Evo Morales, from the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS) Party, who stood down after allegations of criminal activity. MAS with a new leader regained power in 2020, but following an economic collapse, in 2024 the government was described as paralysed, with many protests in the capital city of La Paz [4] here. New elections are due in 2025. Ten candidates from left, right and centre parties are contesting the seat of president, but with some of the biggest names in Bolivian politics not standing [5] here.
Paraguay.
Paraguay elected an establishment figure as their president in 2023; President Santiago Pena is an economist who had formally worked for the IMF. Since being elected, Pena has been praised for his management of the economy, with a 4% growth, the best growth in the region. However, he has also been criticised for not addressing corruption and the lack of a social safety net. Some also accuse him of allowing one of the countries richest men, Horacio Cartes, to run the government from behind the scenes, for example, tax on cigarettes remains at 2% despite attempts to raise it to 20%; Cartes wealth is from tobacco production. In 2024, polls showed that Pena had a 48.5% approval rating, but with 48.3% who did not approve [6] here.
Uruguay is the smallest and most stable country in this part of South America. It has a government described as centre-left. Its economy depends on agricultural exports, with China as its biggest customer.
Except for Uruguay, the countries in this region have all suffered from political instability over the past decades, and there are very different styles of leadership across this part of South America. Ideological divisions and divergent priorities means cooperative relations between these countries is unlikely to occur in the near future. There is an economic and political bloc created in 1991, called the Mercosur, that consists of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay. Bolivia became a full member in 2024.
Mercosur has had some success, with an increase in trade within the bloc, and it is also negotiating agreements with the European Union. Deals with China and the USA however have been elusive, despite China and USA being the top trading partners in the region. However, these trade developments have not resulted in closer political ties between the members of Mercosur.
There are no cross-border laws relating to internet regulation in this region. All five countries have laws protecting freedom of speech, although generally it is thought that these laws are not effective. There are reported cases of harassment of the press, especially where criminal activity and drug trafficking are prevalent. In Paraguay for example, three journalists have been murdered in the past five years [7] here. With no coordination of internet regulation, free speech and media regulation at the regional level, the coordination of censorship activities in Latin American has been taken on by the fact check organisation Latam Chequea. It is managed by the Argentinian fact check platform Chequeado [8] here.
Relations between the Trump presidency and Latin America.
Trump did not give emphasis to Central and South America during his election campaign, with the exception of his determination to end migration from the south. During the first weeks of his second term as president, Trump’s priorities in the US relations with Latin America were migration, illegal drugs, and trade. Trump appointed Marco Rubio as his Secretary of State, an American of Cuban descent. Rubio speaks fluent Spanish, and he is considered to be right wing and intolerant of socialist governments in South and Central America, including Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. Both the appointment of Rubio and some of Trump’s first expressed priorities demonstrated that the new president is more interested in South America than had been expected. The border control issues and Trump’s controversial claim to the Panama Canal will be dealt with in a later report.
Unsurprisingly, Argentina’s populist President, Javier Milei, is developing a close relationship with Trump. Trump has called Milei his favourite president, and he was hosted at Trump’s private residence at Mar-a-Lago. Milei was also among the very few world leaders invited to Trump’s inauguration. Trump and Milei share political positions in defending conservative values, by rejecting gender ideology and climate change, whilst defending individualism, the importance of merit, and the virtues of the free market [9] here. This close relationship could herald negotiations for a better US trade agreement, in line with Trump’s aim of reducing China’s growing influence as a global trading partner. Whilst Chile is not yet in the Mercosur region, the possibility of a populist president in neighbouring Chile would strengthen Milei’s position.
Argentina and the emergence of South American censorship.
In Africa the seeds of the development of organised censorship began with Western influences and Western monies, beginning with the launch of the fact check platform Africa Check in South Africa in 2012. Similarly, the first fact check platform in South America was the Argentinian platform Chequeado, which was similarly formed with Western encouragement. It began with three Argentinian professionals who had lived and worked in the USA, Julio Aaronvich, Jose Bekinschtein, and Roberto Lugo. All were at retirement age, none had previous experience of working in the media, but Aaronvich had observed FactCheck.org in the US, and thought a similar initiative could work in Argentina. Chequeado (Verified) was launched in 2010 with support from the United Nations Fund for Democracy (UNFD) [10] here.
Chequeado is now a significant player with thirty-eight employees. Although it states that it is transparent about its funding, its funding details are challenging to find on its website. Names that were listed on projects include Canada Fund for Local Initiatives, Pulitzer Center, GoogleNI, National Endowment for Democracy (NED), and the Latin American Center for Investigative Journalism (CLIP). It is also a third-party fact checker for Meta [11] here. It’s difficult to locate 2023 accounts that lists many funders including Luminate, Google, Poyner Institute, Twitter, International Center for Journalists (ICFJ), NED, and UNESCO [12] here. According to the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN), Chequeado accepts funding from embassies based in Argentina, such as the Netherlands, New Zealand, the UK and the USA, among others, as part of its funding diversification strategy [13] here. Hence Chequeado receives the same lines of funding as most other fact check platforms across the globe – from North Americans and Europeans with immense wealth and power.
The director of the IFCN stated:
“Chequeado is a remarkable organisation. They were among the first digital fact-checking projects and can now be considered one of the global leaders. They have continuously innovated their formats, channels and approaches in order to seek the greatest possible impact for the benefit of their cause: increasing accuracy in the public sphere.” [14] here.
Looking at the activities on the Chequeado website, they claim to operate media, education, innovation and new initiatives programmes in order to improve debate, develop antidotes to misinformation, and promote access to information and data. However, the fact check industry is an essential tool for those with immense wealth and power who are used to censor information that does not meet with their preferred narratives.
For example, one Chequeado fact check concerns climate geoengineering – the question asked is whether geoengineering is linked to global warming [15] here. In fact, dissenting scientists who are investigating geoengineering think that geoengineering is used to cause dimming of the sun, not global warming [16] here. The question investigated is itself puzzling – why choose this question? In its fact check report, Chequeado does not contact dissenting scientists but only consults official sources. Official opinions are of course relevant, but dissenting opinion of other climatologists who have studied geoengineering would add value. This one-dimensional view does not improve debate, but narrows it, and calling dissenting opinions ‘conspiracy theories’ does not encourage a respectful sharing of ideas.
Another Chequeado fact check is of a statement made by Nobel Prize laureate John Clauser, after he stated that there is not a climate crisis [17] here. Clauser is scientist qualified to make such a statement and his contribution to the debate is important, whether he is right or wrong. Chequeado states that Clauser is funded by the fossil fuel industry, and an alternative scientist from the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is quoted to ‘prove’ that Clauser is wrong; Chequeado also states that over 99% of academic papers take the opposite view. However, science has always been a debate between scientists with opposing positions; minority views are often the way that science moves forward; the smearing of an eminent scientist by a journalist from Chequeado is an inappropriate and disrespectful response. The climate lobby that funds current research is as well funded as the fossil fuel industry, including a diverse and vast decarbonisation industry and controversial banking projects that include the monetarisation of nature [18] here. Debate between scientists should be a normal occurrence and censorship organisations funded by those of immense wealth such as Chequeado have no place in arbitrating in a debate between scientists. The public have every right to listen to all opinions, ask questions, and then make up their own minds.
Chequeado does not add to quality of debate as it claims, but it inflames differences. It does not expose disinformation, but it supports narratives of policy makers who aim for a global governance. It is paid to do so by funders from the USA and Europe, that have infiltrated minds in Argentina and Latin America; it is not an independent organisation as it may believe itself to be.
Chequeado cooperates with 60 universities that teach fact checking and media literacy, and it operates the Latam Chequea platform that coordinates 35 fact check platforms across Latin America, and acts as the coordinator of Latin American censorship. Chequeado also launched a fact check platform in Argentina called Reverso that is a consortium of 40 media organisations. Chequeado dominates censorship in Argentina and has a huge influence on controlling information in South and Central America.
Chile.
Chile has a more diverse fact checking industry than Argentina, with one international fact check platform, the French AFP that fact checks on behalf of Meta, and twelve national fact check platforms. This includes six platforms linked to media outlets, three independent platforms, and three university censorship projects. AFP and two other fact check platforms are verified signatories of the IFCN.
One of the three independent platforms is the Fake News Report; in 2023 and it was described as self-funding. The website could not be accessed in 2025, but a Facebook page and Instagram account was located. Another independent platform Mala Espina is a verified signatory of the IFCN, and a member of Latam Chequea. It states that it is partly funded by its founder, its educational projects are founded by GoogleNI., and other projects are funded by the Argentinian Chequeado [19] here. The Duke Reporters Lab (DRL) website states that Mala Espina is funded by the European Konrad Adenauer Stiftung. Another independent platform is Fast Check Chile, also an IFCN signatory. It is also a third-party fact checker for Meta, and in 2023, 98% of its income was from contracts with technology companies, and 2% from subscriptions. It has a Google banner on its website [20] here.
Interestingly, three Chilean universities have fact check platforms, presumably associated with journalism programmes: Universidad de Concepcion; Universidad Catolica de Chile; and Universidad Adolfo Ibanez [21] here. Not all of the fact check platforms linked to the Chilean media are currently active, and they may activate sporadically in response to events such as elections and emergencies. Another independent fact check platform operates in Chile, but it moderates content in Venezuela and will be dealt with when covering that country.
Bolivia.
Bolivia has three fact check platforms; the French AFP and two national fact check platforms. Bolivia Verifica is a verified signatory of the IFCN and a member of Latam Chequea. It has an online digital news platform owned by the Foundation for Journalism. It is funded by the American CIA cutout National Endowment for Democracy (NED), Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation; and the IFCN. Another platform Chequea Bolivia was launched by the Center for Science and Social and Economic Reality (CERES) and according to DRL it is funded by NED. On the Chequea Bolivia website it works on content moderation projects with five Bolivian universities.
Paraguay.
Paraguay is also fact checked by the ubiquitous AFP on behalf of Meta, and there is also one national fact check platform that is a member of Latam Chequea. El Suridor (also known as El Surti) was launched by Memetic Media [22] here. El Suridor is coy about the funding of its censorship activities, but via Latam Chequea it has received funding from Google for its work on the coronavirus project [23] here.
Uruguay.
AFP and Meta continue their censorship partnership in Uruguay. Additionally, Uruguay has one national fact check platform that is part of Latam Chequea, La Daria Verifica (LDV) [24] here. It is an online news platform, and on its website LDV states that it is supported by the Argentinian Chequeado and funded by the IFCN. Two other fact check platforms were located, one associated with a university but the website is no longer available, and one other platform only contains past archives and is not currently active.
Conclusion.
The five southernmost countries in South America, like their neighbour Brazil, have polarised populations and leaders from both populist and woke political ideologies. Although all but Chile belong to a regional economic and political bloc, the developments on trade have been more beneficial than the creation of political stability. In the absence of any coordinated cross-border censorship agreement, the fact check industry has stepped in and taken over that role.
The Argentine fact check platform Chequeado is clearly the most important player in censorships activities in the region. It has assisted with the launch of new fact check platforms, and it manages a network of fact checkers across Latin America, as well as coordinating media outlets and university censorship projects within Argentina. Chequeado was founded by Argentinians who were influenced by fact checkers in the USA, with funds from the UN, the USA and Europe. The same funding sources were found across the region. This management of information by those with immense wealth and power from the USA and Europe is a new form of colonisation, and South American fact checkers have become the soldiers, sepoys, that control Latin America on behalf of their foreign paymasters.