Methodology
This page explains how every claim on this site is selected, checked, rated and published. We publish it in full so readers can judge the process, not just the conclusion.
1. How claims are selected
We review publicly available recordings and reporting of each rally in the “Chhatron Ki Goonj” series. A statement is taken up for checking when it meets all of the following:
- It is a factual assertion — something that can, in principle, be shown true or false. Predictions, opinions, promises and rhetorical questions are not rated.
- It was made from the stage at one of the rallies covered here.
- It is checkable against a documented source — official statistics, a government release, a parliamentary answer, a regulator’s filing, or published reporting.
We do not rate statements of political preference, value judgements, or matters of interpretation on which reasonable people differ.
2. What evidence we accept
We work from primary sources wherever one exists, in this order of preference:
- Official government data — ministry releases, Press Information Bureau statements, statistical publications.
- Parliamentary answers and tabled documents.
- Regulator, university or examination-body publications.
- Established news reporting, used where no primary document is available, and identified as such.
Points that rest on a documentary source carry a link to that source, and the complete source index lists all 169 citations used on this site. Where a figure appears without a citation, it has not yet been linked to a published source; we are working through those, and readers should treat an uncited figure as carrying less weight than a cited one. If you can point us to the primary source for any uncited figure, please tell us.
3. Our rating scale
| Rating | What it means | Claims so rated |
|---|---|---|
| False | The claim is contradicted by the primary evidence we could locate. Figures, dates or facts do not match the official record. | 29 |
| Misleading | The claim contains an element that is accurate, but framing, missing context or selective figures lead the listener to a wrong conclusion. | 11 |
We currently publish two ratings. Where a claim turns out to be substantially accurate, we do not publish a page for it; our archive therefore records the claims we found to be false or misleading, and is not a representative sample of everything said at these rallies. Readers should treat it as a record of disputed claims, not as a scorecard of an entire speech.
4. Editorial standpoint
This site publishes political commentary and analysis. Our ratings reflect the editorial judgement of this publication, applied to the evidence described above. We are not a certified or independently accredited fact-checking organisation, and we do not claim to be neutral between political parties. Readers should weigh our conclusions alongside other sources, and every citation is published precisely so that they can.
5. Right of reply and corrections
Any person or organisation whose statement is analysed here may write to us at support@jhootkigoonj.in to dispute a rating or supply additional evidence. We review every such submission. Where we are shown to be wrong, we correct the page and record the change on our corrections page. See also our editorial policy.
6. Updates
Claim pages are dated. Where new evidence changes a rating after publication, the page is updated and the change is logged. This methodology was last reviewed on 2026-08-28.