Lesson Report:
## Title: From OSINT Skills to the “Politics of Truth�: Selecting Political Media and Launching Verification Reports
**Synopsis (2–3 sentences):**
This session connected last class’s OSINT skills (reverse image search and geolocation) to core course themes in political science, especially the “politics of truth� and state propaganda. Students worked in breakout groups to choose politically salient or suspicious media items from social platforms, then began structuring a standardized verification report (claim, geolocation, time assessment, source assessment) in a shared Google Doc template, with primary emphasis on geolocation strategies.
—
## Attendance
– **Students mentioned absent/not present at roll check:** 1 (Adina was not seen when room assignments were created)
—
## Topics Covered (Chronological, with detailed activity notes)
### 1) Course Framing: Linking Verification Skills to Political Science and “Politics of Truth�
– Instructor set today’s goal: move beyond a technical introduction and connect OSINT verification to political science questions—how truth claims become political tools.
– Recap of Monday’s two core skills:
– **Geolocation**
– Determining where an image/video was taken.
– Ideal case: **metadata/GPS** embedded in a file (precise coordinates, device model, etc.).
– More common case: infer location via **visual clues** (built environment, signage, terrain, architecture, etc.).
– **Reverse image search**
– Used to find where an image originated, when it first appeared, and in what context.
– Key use case: detecting **misattributed media** (real image, false claim about place/time/context).
– Political justification for learning these tools:
– Course has emphasized dark dynamics: algorithmic “bubbles,â€� manipulation, and state propaganda.
– Instructor “flipped the tableâ€� framing: despite unprecedented propaganda, citizens now have unprecedented **power to verify** using public tools and open data.
– Historical contrast example: *Operation INFEKTION* and the AIDS/HIV disinformation campaign—previously, ordinary citizens had few ways to verify claims independently.
– Student contribution (Elaine) used as explicit bridge:
– Recalled prior example where Russia used a **video game screenshot** to make a real-world claim.
– Emphasized the purpose: **fact-checking** and not accepting media at face value.
—
### 2) Activity Setup: Selecting a “Politically Powerful� or “Suspicious� Media Item (Breakout Rooms)
– Instructor reminded students of prior class homework/activity: students were asked to find political media on social platforms (Twitter/X, Threads, Instagram, etc.) to analyze.
– Instructions for first breakout (5 minutes):
– Share items found within the group.
– Choose **one** item meeting at least one criterion:
– Politically powerful/aggressive/strong claims, *or*
– “Feels off,â€� too good to be true, potentially inaccurate or suspicious.
– Prepare to explain **what** was chosen and **why** it deserves verification.
– Breakout rooms were reconstructed (9 rooms). Notable administrative note:
– Adina was not found at the time of room creation; room membership was adjusted.
—
### 3) Whole-Class Share-Out: Each Group Reports Conflict + Media Type + Platform
Instructor collected from each breakout room:
1) the conflict (domestic/international), and
2) what media was selected (platform + whether image/video/text).
#### Room 1 (Imad, Ivan, Timur): “Epstein files� used to support COVID-19 conspiracy framing
– Selected media: **Instagram post** alleging COVID-19 was staged/preplanned, tied to “Epstein filesâ€� via an email claiming “preparing for COVID-19.â€�
– Instructor guidance:
– Goal is not to prove COVID origins in one class.
– Verification target should be **the purported email/document** (authenticity, provenance), since “white screen with Times New Romanâ€� text is easy to fabricate.
– Clarified the distinction: verify the *artifact/source* and origins of the claim, not the ultimate scientific truth.
#### Room 2 (Kamila, Samira, Zamira): China–Taiwan tensions via YouTube news footage
– Conflict: China–Taiwan tensions.
– Selected media: **YouTube video (Times Now)** posted Feb 16, describing Chinese fighter jets crossing the median line and ships increasing military pressure.
– Instructor guidance:
– Identify the *claims* embedded in the footage (who owns the planes/ships; what operation is being shown).
– Verification approach should focus on whether the footage actually depicts what the narration claims (ownership, location, context), even if students cannot access the area directly.
#### Room 3 (Akhilai, Floran, Nilufar): Iran protests (BBC photo + an additional Instagram video)
– Conflict: Domestic protests in Iran.
– Selected media:
– **BBC post** (text + photo) showing a crowd with flags.
– Additional find: **Instagram video** (non-official account) dated Feb 11 showing protest situation.
– Instructor guidance:
– Primary task: verify whether the image/video is actually from Iran and tied to the protest context.
– Explicit methodological warning: **do not use language alone** (Farsi signs / people speaking) as definitive proof.
– Students should seek non-language visual clues and other OSINT corroboration.
#### Room 4 (Aynula, Kaneke, Sen): Russia–Ukraine war image of damaged Ukrainian thermal power plant
– Conflict described as “Russian and Afghan warâ€� (likely meant Russia–Ukraine; context indicates Ukraine).
– Selected media: **Photo** posted by a Ukrainian citizen claiming a Ukrainian thermal power plant was damaged by Russian attacks.
– Group’s first step: reverse searched and found the same photo reposted with similar text across multiple channels.
– Instructor guidance:
– Triangulation (many sources reposting) is a good start but not enough: “multiple people can be wrong / repeat the same lie.â€�
– Next steps must address:
– **Is it really Ukraine?**
– **When was it taken?**
– **Does the photo match the captioned claim?**
– Emphasized that Russia–Ukraine has spotlighted OSINT and citizen verification.
#### Room 5 (Alexei, Chinara, Natalia): Viral X/Twitter claim about a politician being Epstein’s biological son
– Selected media: **Twitter/X post** from “USA Newsâ€� (1.3M followers).
– Claim: “Very real possibilityâ€� that “Vakhram/Zoran Mamdaniâ€� is Epstein’s biological son; comments include images of Epstein, Mamdani, Mamdani’s mother, and prominent figures (Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, Jeff Bezos, etc.).
– Group question/theme: whether images are **AI-generated** and/or miscontextualized.
– Instructor guidance:
– Students likely can’t prove relationships conclusively.
– Verification should focus on the **images’ provenance** and whether they truly come from the “Epstein files.â€�
– Complication acknowledged: reverse image search won’t automatically debunk if material was “just released.â€�
– Students should plan how to verify whether the images actually appear in authentic public “Epstein filesâ€� repositories.
#### Room 6 (Alihan, Helen, Ofarid): Sensational “Trump arrested� post with likely AI-generated audio
– Selected media: “Trump being arrestedâ€� claim; format described as a picture + a journalist voiceover that sounded AI-generated; posted on an entertainment account with ~33K likes.
– Instructor guidance:
– Concern raised: this claim may be **too easy** to verify (if Trump were arrested, it would be widely reported).
– Recommendation: choose an item “between truth and fictionâ€� where verification is genuinely ambiguous and requires OSINT techniques, not just common knowledge.
#### Room 7 (Elayim, Nahida, Subhan): Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan conflict and recycled photo example
– Conflict: Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan (information war dynamics).
– Shared example: a photo of a destroyed mosque circulated as if from the Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan conflict; journalists later found it was actually from **Syria (2013)**.
– Instructor response:
– Strong example illustrating “information warfareâ€� in conflicts.
– But for the assignment, students need a **new piece of media to verify themselves** (not one already fully debunked by journalists).
– Action: find another disputed/claimed photo from the conflict and run the verification process from scratch.
#### Room 8 (Khadijah, Ruslan): Israel–Hamas conflict; emotionally edited Instagram clip vs full interview
– Selected media: Instagram short video (Reels-style) about a captive’s experience; emotionally framed captions calling for solidarity with Israel.
– Student found the **full interview on YouTube**, noting differences from the short clip (editing and framing changed the emotional effect and implied message).
– Instructor guidance:
– Verify identity and context:
– Was it taken where it claims (place)?
– Is the person who they claim (identity/affiliation)?
– Is timing consistent with the claim?
– Again: do not rely on language alone (e.g., Arabic) as the primary proof of location/identity.
#### Room 9 (Danyek, Nazbikeh, Alihan added): Kyrgyzstan local political controversy—AI/real photo dispute
– Conflict: Local Kyrgyzstan political issue involving early termination/controversy (transcription unclear on name: “Tashkent/Tashievâ€�).
– Selected media: newly circulating photo (posted ~1–2 hours prior) showing the political figure with another politician; disputes about whether:
– they ever met, and/or
– the photo is **AI-generated**.
– Instructor guidance:
– Strong, timely OSINT target.
– Verification questions: authenticity, who is depicted, when/where taken, and whether the image plausibly predates the controversy.
—
### 4) Launching the Core Assignment: Standardized Verification Report Template (Google Doc)
– Instructor introduced the class’s next multi-session workflow:
– Students will **create verification reports** collaboratively.
– Purpose: next week, build a **shared database** documenting how students (as non-experts) approached verification step-by-step.
– Google Doc template instructions:
– Instructor shared a link in chat.
– Students were told **not** to write in the master template.
– Each group should **duplicate the tab** (technical instruction shown via screenshot) and complete their own section.
#### Template fields and expectations (explained by instructor)
1) **Conflict** (domestic/international).
2) **Claim being made**
– Every photo/video “tells a story.â€� Students must articulate:
– What story is being asserted (what happened, where, who did what).
– The implied **goal** of the poster/distributor (what they want the viewer to believe/feel/do).
3) **Geolocation (primary focus today)**
– Use multiple techniques, not just one:
– Metadata (if available),
– Google/Yandex,
– Uploading to tools (students previously suggested ChatGPT-assisted steps),
– Visual clue analysis.
– Emphasized methodological pluralism: tools work best in combination.
– Geolocation verdict categories:
– Confirmed,
– Plausible,
– Contradicted/unclear,
– Unable to verify.
– Caution: do **not** jump straight to labeling “falseâ€� if you can’t verify.
4) **Time assessment** (introduced, likely deferred)
– How to test “whenâ€� a photo/video was taken vs when it claims.
– Use reverse image search to find earliest postings and original contexts.
– Time verdict categories:
– Appears new,
– Appears recycled,
– Unable to verify.
5) **Source assessment**
– Trace the earliest/original source (who first posted, where, and in what context).
6) **Analysis** (explicitly noted as likely for next class)
—
### 5) Second Breakout: Begin Geolocation Strategy Work (15 minutes)
– Instruction for remaining time:
– Focus on **geolocation first**.
– Identify anticipated challenges for their specific media (e.g., screenshots, repost chains, edited clips, AI-generated imagery).
– Develop a concrete plan using multiple tools and visual evidence.
– Reiterated constraint:
– **Do not use spoken/written language alone** as the decisive proof of location/identity; rely on visual clues and cross-verification methods.
*(Transcript ends as students are being sent back into breakout rooms.)*
—
## Actionable Items (Short bullets, organized by urgency)
### Urgent / Before Next Class
– **Attendance follow-up:** Confirm whether **Adina** was absent or had a connectivity issue (she was not seen during room assignment).
– **Verification report setup:** Ensure every group:
– Accesses the Google Doc template,
– **Duplicates their tab** (does not edit the master template),
– Records the conflict + media link/source info clearly.
– **Geolocation progress:** Each group should complete at least an initial geolocation attempt and document:
– Visual clues used,
– Tools used (Google/Yandex/metadata/etc.),
– A geolocation verdict (confirmed/plausible/contradicted/unable).
### High Priority (Refine Media Choice Where Needed)
– **Room 6:** Replace or supplement the “Trump arrestedâ€� item with a more ambiguous case (“between truth and fictionâ€�) that requires OSINT rather than general news awareness.
– **Room 7:** Select a *new* Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan conflict media item to verify (not one already investigated/debunked by journalists).
### Ongoing / Next Session Planning
– Prepare to extend reports beyond geolocation into:
– **Time assessment** (first appearance, recycling, date mismatch),
– **Source assessment** (original poster/channel, provenance),
– Light **analysis** (how framing/edits shift political meaning).
– Reinforce class-wide methodological rule: avoid relying on **language-only** evidence; prioritize verifiable visual and contextual indicators across multiple tools.
Homework Instructions:
NO HOMEWORK — The transcript only describes in-class activities (e.g., “For today’s class, we’re going to be working with those [media]… I’m going to be sending you guys off… within five minutes…,� and later “I’m going to send you a link to a Google Doc… you’re going to be filling out this form… For this next 15 minutes… focus on the geolocation… I’m going to send you guys into your breakout rooms once again�), but it does not include any instruction to complete or submit work after class.