Totoo

Rating: 8.0/10

Mag-ulat ng Isyu
Coalition
C0889

Ang Claim

“Pumili ng isang tagapagtanggi ng climate change para mamuno sa pagsusuri ng target sa renewable energy.”
Klima Kapaligiran
Orihinal na Pinagmulan: Matthew Davis
Sinuri: 3 Feb 2026

Orihinal na Pinagmulan

✅ FACTUAL NA BERIPIKASYON

Ang claim ay **tama sa katotohanan**.
The claim is **factually accurate**.
 Noong Pebrero 2014, itinalaga ng gobyernong Abbott si Dick Warburton AO LVO, isang negosyante at self-professed na climate sceptic, para mamuno sa pagsusuri ng Australia's Renewable Energy Target (RET) scheme [1][2].
In February 2014, the Abbott government appointed Dick Warburton AO LVO, a businessman and self-professed climate sceptic, to lead the review of Australia's Renewable Energy Target (RET) scheme [1][2].
 Inanunsyo nang magkasama ng Industry Minister na si Ian Macfarlane at Environment Minister na si Greg Hunt ang review noong 17 Pebrero 2014 [3].
The review was jointly announced by Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane and Environment Minister Greg Hunt on 17 February 2014 [3].
 Si Warburton ay publikong nagsabi ng kanyang mga skeptikal na pananaw tungkol sa climate change.
Warburton has publicly stated his skeptical views on climate change.
 Sa mga interview sa media noong panahon ng kanyang pagkakatalaga, inamin niyang siya ay isang climate sceptic ngunit sinabi niyang magbubukas siya ng isip sa panahon ng pagsusuri [4][5].
In media interviews at the time of his appointment, he acknowledged being a climate sceptic but stated he would keep an open mind during the review [4][5].
 Ang Warburton review ay naglabas ng mga natuklasan noong Agosto 2014, na inirerekomenda na ang Large-scale Renewable Energy Target (LRET) ay magsara para sa mga bagong entrant o mabago nang malaki [6][7].
The Warburton review released its findings in August 2014, recommending that the Large-scale Renewable Energy Target (LRET) be either closed to new entrants or significantly modified [6][7].

Nawawalang Konteksto

Ang claim ay hindi nagpapakita ng ilang mahahalagang kontekstwal na salik: **1.
The claim omits several important contextual factors: **1.
 Mga Kredensyal ni Warburton sa Negosyo**: Si Dick Warburton ay hindi pinili nang basta-basta - siya ay isang beteranong negosyante na may malawak na karanasan sa korporasyon, kabilang bilang Chairman ng manufacturing firm na Tabcorp at dating miyembro ng board ng Reserve Bank [1][2].
Warburton's Business Credentials**: Dick Warburton was not selected arbitrarily - he was a veteran businessman with extensive corporate experience, including as Chairman of manufacturing firm Tabcorp and former Reserve Bank board member [1][2].
 Ang kanyang pagkakatalaga ay inihain ng gobyerno bilang pagdadala ng ekspertisa sa negosyo para suriin ang epekto ng RET sa ekonomiya. **2.
His appointment was framed by the government as bringing business expertise to assess the economic impact of the RET. **2.
 Komposisyon ng Review Panel**: Ang pagsusuri ay isinagawa ng isang panel, hindi lamang ni Warburton.
Review Panel Composition**: The review was conducted by a panel, not solely by Warburton.
 Ang panel ay sinuportahan ng isang secretariat sa loob ng Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet at kinabibilangan ng iba pang mga miyembro na may iba't ibang ekspertisa [6]. **3.
The panel was supported by a secretariat within the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and included other members with diverse expertise [6]. **3.
 Depensa ni Warburton sa Proseso**: Si Warburton ay publikong ipinagtanggol ang proseso ng pagsusuri, sinasabing ang kanyang mga personal na pananaw tungkol sa climate change ay walang kinalaman sa mga natuklasan ng panel at na kanyang nilapitan ang pagsusuri na may "bukas na isip" [4][5].
Warburton's Defense of Process**: Warburton publicly defended the review process, stating his personal views on climate change had no bearing on the panel's findings and that he approached the review with an "open mind" [4][5].
 Bagama't tinutulan ito ng mga kritiko, bahagi ito ng rekord na dapat kilalanin. **4.
While critics disputed this, it is part of the record that should be acknowledged. **4.
 Mga Nakaraang RET Reviews**: Ang RET ay na-review nang maraming beses noon.
Previous RET Reviews**: The RET had been reviewed multiple times previously.
 Ang Climate Change Authority (na itinatag sa ilalim ng Labor) ay nakapag-conduct na ng mga pagsusuri ng RET noong 2012 at nagpatuloy na magbigay ng pagsusuri sa panahong ito [6].
The Climate Change Authority (established under Labor) had already conducted reviews of the RET in 2012 and continued to provide analysis during this period [6].
 Ang pagsusuri noong 2014 ay sinimulan ng bagong Coalition government pagkatapos nilang manalo noong 2013. **5.
The 2014 review was initiated by the new Coalition government after it took office in 2013. **5.
 Resulta ng mga Rekomendasyon**: Ang pinakamatinding mga rekomendasyon ng Warburton review (ang pagsasara ng LRET para sa mga bagong entrant) ay sa huli ay **hindi naipatupad** nang buo.
Outcome of Recommendations**: The Warburton review's most contentious recommendations (closing the LRET to new entrants) were ultimately **not implemented** in full.
 Pagkatapos ng malawakang debate sa pulitika at pagtutol ng industriya, ang gobyerno ay sa huli ay nag-settle sa mas hindi drastic na pagbaba sa RET target (mula 41,000 GWh hanggang 33,000 GWh sa pamamagitan ng 2020) sa halip na ganap na pagsasara [8].
After extensive political debate and industry opposition, the government eventually settled on a less drastic reduction in the RET target (from 41,000 GWh to 33,000 GWh by 2020) rather than complete closure [8].

Pagsusuri ng Kredibilidad ng Pinagmulan

Ang orihinal na pinagmulan, **RenewEconomy**, ay isang Australia-focused website na nagdadalubhasa sa mga balita tungkol sa renewable energy at pagsusuri ng patakaran sa klima.
The original source, **RenewEconomy**, is an Australia-focused website specializing in renewable energy news and climate policy analysis.
 Itinatag noong 2012, ito ay naging isang nangungunang pinagmulan para sa mga balita tungkol sa malinis na enerhiya sa Australia [9][10]. **Pagsusuri:** - Ang RenewEconomy ay malinaw na nakatuon sa pag-promote ng renewable energy at aksyon sa klima, na lumilikha ng isang **advocacy-oriented na pananaw** - Ang site ay inilarawan ang sarili bilang nakatuon sa "mga balita at pagsusuri tungkol sa malinis na enerhiya" [9] - Ang mga pinagkukunan ng pagsusuri sa media ay inilarawan ito bilang "balanseng at maalalahanin" na may "nuanced na pananaw" [10], bagama't ang pokus nito sa paksa ay likas na lumilikha ng isang pro-renewables na bias - Ang headline framing ("climate change denier") ay gumagamit ng charged na wika na nagdiin sa pinakakontrobersyal na aspeto Bagama't ang factual claim tungkol sa pagkakatalaga kay Warburton ay tama, ang mga mambabasa ay dapat maging aware na ang RenewEconomy ay may malinaw na editorial stance na pabor sa patakaran sa renewable energy at laban sa mga interes ng fossil fuel.
Founded in 2012, it has become a leading source for clean energy news in Australia [9][10]. **Assessment:** - RenewEconomy is clearly focused on promoting renewable energy and climate action, which creates an **advocacy-oriented perspective** - The site describes itself as focusing on "clean energy news and analysis" [9] - Media assessment sources describe it as "balanced and thoughtful" with "nuanced perspective" [10], though its subject matter focus inherently creates a pro-renewables bias - The headline framing ("climate change denier") uses charged language that emphasizes the most controversial aspect While the factual claim about Warburton's appointment is accurate, readers should be aware that RenewEconomy has a clear editorial stance in favor of renewable energy policy and against fossil fuel interests.
 Ang headline ay nagdiin sa kontrobersya sa halip na magbigay ng neutral na framing.
The headline emphasizes the controversy rather than providing neutral framing.
⚖️

Paghahambing sa Labor

**Nagtalaga ba ang Labor ng mga taong may mga paunang natukoy na pananaw sa mga pagsusuri?** Ang mga gobyerno ng lahat ng uri ng pulitikal na kumbiksyon ay karaniwang nagtatalaga ng mga chair ng review panel na ang mga pananaw ay nakahanay sa kanilang mga prayoridad sa patakaran.
**Did Labor appoint people with predetermined views to reviews?** Governments of all political persuasions typically appoint review panel chairs whose views align with their policy priorities.
 Ito ay karaniwang kasanayan sa pulitika ng Australia: - **Climate Change Authority**: Itinatag ng gobyernong Gillard Labor noong 2011, ang Authority mismo ay dinisenyo para magbigay ng independiyenteng payo tungkol sa patakaran sa klima.
This is standard practice in Australian politics: - **Climate Change Authority**: Established by the Gillard Labor government in 2011, the Authority itself was designed to provide independent advice on climate policy.
 Ang mga miyembro ng board nito ay itinalaga ng Labor at sa pangkalahatan ay suportado ang aksyon sa klima [6]. - **Karaniwang Kasanayan ng Gobyerno**: Tulad ng nabanggit sa Australian Government Appointments Framework, ang mga ministerial appointment sa mga board at review panel ay karaniwang sumasalamin sa direksyon ng patakaran ng gobyerno [11].
Its board members were appointed by Labor and were generally supportive of climate action [6]. - **Standard Government Practice**: As noted in the Australian Government Appointments Framework, ministerial appointments to boards and review panels typically reflect the government's policy direction [11].
 Bagama't may mga proseso ng seleksyon batay sa merit, natural na pinipili ng mga gobyerno ang mga indibidwal na ang ekspertisa at pananaw ay nakahanay sa kanilang mga prayoridad. - **Walang Direktang Katumbas na Natagpuan**: Ang Labor ay hindi nag-conduct ng isang malaking pagsusuri ng RET sa panahon ng kanilang pamumuno sa gobyerno (2007-2013) dahil nilikha at sinuportahan nila ang patakaran.
While there are merit-based selection processes, governments naturally select individuals whose expertise and perspectives align with their priorities. - **No Direct Equivalent Found**: Labor did not conduct a major review of the RET during their period in government (2007-2013) because they created and supported the policy.
 Gayunpaman, sila ay nagtalaga ng mga lider sa negosyo at eksperto na sumusuporta sa renewable energy at aksyon sa klima sa iba't ibang mga advisory role. **Pangunahing Punto**: Ang nagpagawa ng kontrobersya sa pagkakatalaga kay Warburton ay hindi dahil siya ay may mga pananaw (lahat ng mga itinalaga ay mayroon), kundi dahil ang kanyang mga pananaw ay nakita bilang direktang salungat sa patakarang sinusuri niya.
They did, however, appoint business leaders and experts who supported renewable energy and climate action to various advisory roles. **Key Point**: What made the Warburton appointment controversial was not that he had views (all appointees do), but that his views were perceived to be in direct opposition to the policy he was reviewing.
 Gayunpaman, ang Coalition government ay nagkampanya para sa pagsusuri ng RET, at ang pagtatalaga ng isang taong skeptikal sa climate science at renewable energy subsidies ay nakahanay sa kanilang platform sa patakaran.
However, the Coalition government had campaigned on reviewing the RET, and appointing someone skeptical of both climate science and renewable energy subsidies aligned with their policy platform.
🌐

Balanseng Pananaw

**Ang Puna:** Tinuligsa ng mga kritiko na ang pagtatalaga ng isang kilalang climate sceptic para suriin ang patakaran sa renewable energy ay parang "paglalagay ng isang fox sa pagbabantay ng mga manok" [12].
**The Criticism:** Critics argued that appointing a known climate sceptic to review renewable energy policy was like "putting a fox in charge of the henhouse" [12].
 Ang industriya ng renewable energy ay nagpahayag ng pagkabahala sa pagkakatalaga, na ang mga lider ng industriya ay naglalarawan sa huling ulat bilang kumakatawan sa "pinakamasamang scenario" [13].
The renewable energy industry expressed alarm at the appointment, with industry leaders describing the eventual report as representing the "worst case scenario" [13].
 Ang Clean Energy Council at iba pang mga tagapagtaguyod ay nangatwiran na ang mga personal na pananaw ni Warburton ay lumikha ng isang likas na salungat sa obhetibong pagsusuri ng isang patakarang dinisenyo upang bawasan ang mga emisyon [1]. **Ang Posisyon ng Gobyerno:** Ipinagtanggol ng gobyernong Abbott ang pagkakatalaga sa pamamagitan ng pagdiin sa malawak na karanasan ni Warburton sa negosyo at patakaran sa halip na sa kanyang mga pananaw sa klima [4].
The Clean Energy Council and other advocates argued that Warburton's personal views created an inherent conflict with objectively assessing a policy designed to reduce emissions [1]. **The Government's Position:** The Abbott government defended the appointment by emphasizing Warburton's extensive business and policy experience rather than his climate views [4].
 Mula sa pananaw ng gobyerno: - Ang RET ay dinisenyo upang bawasan ang mga emisyon sa pinakamababang gastos sa mga mamimili - Ang isang negosyante na may ekspertisa sa pananalapi ay maaaring obhetibong suriin kung ang patakaran ay naghahatid ng halaga - Ang pagsusuri ay tungkol sa pagsusuri sa ekonomiya, hindi sa climate science - Ang skepticism ni Warburton tungkol sa climate change ay hindi pumipigil sa kanya mula sa pagsusuri sa ekonomiya ng RET scheme **Ang Kompleksidad:** Ang RET review ay naganap sa isang panahon ng malaking polarisasyon sa pulitika sa paligid ng patakaran sa klima sa Australia.
From the government's perspective: - The RET was designed to reduce emissions at least cost to consumers - A businessman with financial expertise could objectively assess whether the policy was delivering value - The review was about economic assessment, not climate science - Warburton's skepticism about climate change didn't preclude him from analyzing the economics of the RET scheme **The Complexity:** The RET review occurred at a time of significant political polarization around climate policy in Australia.
 Ang gobyernong Abbott ay nahalal noong 2013 sa isang platform na kinabibilangan ng pag-abolish sa carbon price (na kanilang ginawa) at pagsusuri ng RET.
The Abbott government had been elected in 2013 on a platform that included abolishing the carbon price (which they did) and reviewing the RET.
 Ang pagtatalaga kay Warburton ay nag-signify ng intensyon ng gobyerno na seryosong suriin ang mga gastos ng scheme, na konsistent sa kanilang mga pangakong pang-eleksyon.
The appointment of Warburton signaled the government's intent to seriously examine the costs of the scheme, which was consistent with their election commitments.
 Si Warburton mismo ay ipinagtanggol ang kanyang obhetibidad, sinasabi sa ABC Radio: "Ako ay isang taong tumitingin sa mga katotohanan at gumagawa ng mga desisyon batay sa mga katotohanan, at iyon ang aking ginawa sa pagsusuring ito" [4].
Warburton himself defended his objectivity, telling ABC Radio: "I have been a person who looks at the facts and makes decisions on the facts, and that's what I've done in this review" [4].
 Kung tinatanggap ng isa ang depensang ito o hindi, ang panel ay nag-conduct ng isang komprehensibong pagsusuri na kinilala na ang RET ay matagumpay na na-promote ang renewable generation (higit sa 5,000 MW ang naka-install) [6]. **Komparatibong Konteksto:** Ang pagkakatalagang ito ay sumasalamin sa isang mas malawak na pattern kung saan ang mga gobyerno ay pumipili ng mga tagapagsuri na ang mga pananaw ay nakahanay sa kanilang direksyon sa patakaran.
Whether one accepts this defense or not, the panel did conduct a comprehensive review that acknowledged the RET had successfully promoted renewable generation (over 5,000 MW installed) [6]. **Comparative Context:** This appointment reflects a broader pattern where governments select reviewers whose perspectives align with their policy direction.
 Ang kontrobersya ay pinalala dahil: 1.
The controversy was heightened because: 1.
 Ang climate change ay (at nananatiling) isang lubos na polarized na isyu sa pulitika ng Australia 2.
Climate change was (and remains) a highly polarized issue in Australian politics 2.
 Ang RET ay isa sa mga ilang patakaran sa klima na natitira pagkatapos ng pag-abolish sa carbon price 3.
The RET was one of the few climate policies remaining after the carbon price repeal 3.
 Si Warburton ay hindi karaniwang tapat tungkol sa kanyang climate skepticism, na ginagawang mas blatant ang pagkakatalaga kaysa sa karaniwang mga pagtatalaga ng gobyerno Gayunpaman, ang mga gobyerno ay regular na nagtatalaga ng mga taong may mga pananaw na nakahanay sa kanilang mga layunin sa patakaran - ang Labor ay nagtalaga ng mga tagapagtaguyod ng klima sa mga climate advisory role, tulad ng pagtatalaga ng Coalition ng isang climate sceptic para suriin ang isang patakaran sa klima na sila ay skeptikal.
Warburton was unusually candid about his climate skepticism, making the appointment appear more brazen than typical government appointments However, governments regularly appoint people with views aligned to their policy goals - Labor appointed climate advocates to climate advisory roles, just as the Coalition appointed a climate skeptic to review a climate policy they were skeptical of.

TOTOO

8.0

sa 10

Ang pangunahing claim ay tama sa katotohanan: ang gobyernong Abbott Coalition ay talagang nagtalaga kay Dick Warburton, isang self-professed na climate sceptic, para mamuno sa pagsusuri noong 2014 ng Australia's Renewable Energy Target.
The core claim is factually accurate: the Abbott Coalition government did appoint Dick Warburton, a self-professed climate sceptic, to lead the 2014 review of Australia's Renewable Energy Target.
 Ito ay bagay ng pampublikong rekord at malawak na naiulat noong panahong iyon [1][2][4].
This is a matter of public record and was widely reported at the time [1][2][4].

📚 MGA PINAGMULAN AT SANGGUNIAN (12)

  1. 1
    Dick Warburton says climate sceptic views did not influence report recommending slashing of renewable energy target

    Dick Warburton says climate sceptic views did not influence report recommending slashing of renewable energy target

    The climate sceptic and businessman chosen by the Abbott government to lead its review of the renewable energy target has denied his personal views have had any influence on the panel's report, which recommends that the scheme be dramatically cut back.

    The Sydney Morning Herald
  2. 2
    thechronicle.com.au

    Climate sceptic hired for renewables review denies bias

    Thechronicle Com

  3. 3
    PDF

    Renewable Energy Target Scheme Review

    Mothersagainstturbines • PDF Document
  4. 4
    Warburton defends climate views

    Warburton defends climate views

    The chair of the Government's review into Australia's 20 per cent renewable energy target says he's not a climate change denier, and will keep an open mind during the review. Dick Warburton says he is sceptical about human induced global warming, but will approach this review like any other government inquiry.

    ABC listen
  5. 5
    Climate sceptic had 'open mind' on renewable energy target review

    Climate sceptic had 'open mind' on renewable energy target review

    Dick Warburton says his personal views sceptical of climate change had no bearing on his review of the renewable energy target scheme.

    SBS News
  6. 6
    climatechangeauthority.gov.au

    2014 Renewable Energy Target Review

    Climatechangeauthority Gov

  7. 7
    Aussie panel says stop RET for new large projects, kill small renewables support

    Aussie panel says stop RET for new large projects, kill small renewables support

    (SeeNews) - Aug 28, 2014 - The panel reviewing Australia’s Renewable Energy Target (RET) is recommending that the support scheme for large-scale projects be closed to new entrants and is calling for the immediate scrapping or significant cuts to the small-scale renewables category.

    Renewables Now
  8. 8
    Dick Warburton report recommends Tony Abbott slash renewable energy target

    Dick Warburton report recommends Tony Abbott slash renewable energy target

    Tony Abbott has been given cover to break an election promise not to touch Australia’s renewable energy target...

    Canberratimes Com
  9. 9
    reneweconomy.com.au

    RenewEconomy

    Reneweconomy Com

  10. 10
    Renew Economy - News Publisher Profile

    Renew Economy - News Publisher Profile

    Discover Renew Economy's top journalists and social feeds on PressContact! Curated by PR experts to help your PR campaign, updated in 2025.

    News Publisher Profile
  11. 11
    apsc.gov.au

    Australian Government Appointments Framework

    Apsc Gov

  12. 12
    Coalition's renewable energy review an 'unprecedented scam', industry says

    Coalition's renewable energy review an 'unprecedented scam', industry says

    environment environment Coalition’s renewable energy review an ‘unprecedented scam’, industry says Review assumes fossil fuel investors won’t need to factor in any risk due to climate policies for decades The government's review of the renewable energy target assumes no risk to investments in coal-fired power stations for the next couple of decades. Photograph: Greg Wood/AFP/Getty Images Lenore Taylor, political editor Thursday 24 April 2014 12.39 EST 301 comments The renewable energy industry has labelled a controversial Abbott government review an “unprecedented scam” and a “stitch-up” after learning that it was conducting electricity industry modelling on the assumption there would be no risk or cost to investments in coal-fired power stations in the next few decades. The review of the renewable energy target – headed by veteran businessman and self-professed climate sceptic Dick Warburton – and its modellers from ACIL Allen consulting held a workshop with industry participants on Wednesday at which they revealed the modelling would assume investors in fossil fuel generation would not need to factor in any risk due to climate policies for decades – neither a carbon price, nor a requirement to invest in emission-reducing technologies, nor any cost from any other government policy or regulation. Many of the 50 participants said this assumption was entirely unrealistic. John Grimes, chief executive of the Australian Solar Council, said it made the whole review a farce. “This is an absolute stitch-up. They are predetermining the outcome of this modelling by the assumptions they are making … it is an unprecedented scam in policy-making and it needs to be called for what it is,” Grimes told Guardian Australia. “It is clear that the RET review report will protect the vested interests in the current electricity market.” Grimes said that any model that ignored international action on climate change and failed to consider a carbon price up to 2030 “lacks any credibility”. Ric Brazzale, managing director of Green Energy Trading, said it was “ridiculous to assume you can increase greenhouse emissions for decades with no kind of cost or risk at all”. “They are not going to come up with a fair outcome if they assume there is no carbon price and no kind of carbon constraint at all,” Brazzale said. It is understood the workshop was also told the review had not considered the government’s election promise to provide subsidies to put solar panels on another one million roofs because there was as yet no policy detail behind it. Dick Warburton, a veteran industrialist and current chairman of the Westfield Retail Trust, described his views on climate science in a 2011 interview on ABC. “Well I am a sceptic. I’ve never moved away from that. I’ve always believed sceptical,’’ he said. “But a sceptic is a different person than a denier. I say the science is not settled. I’m not saying it’s wrong. I’ve never said it’s wrong, but I don’t believe it’s settled.” He is joined on the review panel by the former executive director of the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Brian Fisher, director of Asciano Limited and the CSIRO, Shirley In't Veld and the managing director of the Australian Energy Market Operator, Matt Zema. The review is charged with looking at “the economic, environmental and social impacts of the RET scheme, in particular the impacts on electricity prices, energy markets, the renewable energy sector, the manufacturing sector and Australian households” and with assessing how it fits with the government’s aim of “reducing business costs”. It has asked for submissions on whether the RET should be “abolished, reduced or increased”. The target – introduced by the Howard government and expanded by the Rudd government – now requires that 41,000 gigawatt hours of energy be sourced from renewables by 2020. At the time it was enacted that represented 20% of the market, but due to falling electricity demand, it will now be well over 20% – which has prompted calls for the target date to be pushed out or the target reduced, including a plan privately floated by the environment minister, Greg Hunt, for it to become a 25% by 2025 target. But others, including the government’s top business adviser, Maurice Newman, want the RET scrapped altogether. Newman, the former chairman of the ABC and the ASX, has said persisting with government subsidies for renewable energy represented a “crime against the people” because higher energy costs hit poorer households the hardest and there was no longer any logical reason to have them. In setting up its own RET review, the government bypassed the Climate Change Authority – which it wants to abolish – but which is required by legislation to undertake regular reviews of the RET. Ta

    Ecoradio

Pamamaraan ng Rating Scale

1-3: MALI

Hindi tama sa katotohanan o malisyosong gawa-gawa.

4-6: BAHAGYA

May katotohanan ngunit kulang o baluktot ang konteksto.

7-9: HALOS TOTOO

Maliit na teknikal na detalye o isyu sa pagkakasulat.

10: TUMPAK

Perpektong na-verify at patas ayon sa konteksto.

Pamamaraan: Ang mga rating ay tinutukoy sa pamamagitan ng cross-referencing ng opisyal na mga rekord ng pamahalaan, independiyenteng mga organisasyong nag-fact-check, at mga primaryang dokumento.

Previous: C0888 Next: C0890