Before sharing a war claim, check what the evidence actually measures

Break one dramatic claim into smaller questions

A post may combine a photograph, a location, a casualty figure and an accusation about who was responsible. Each element needs its own evidence.

An authentic photograph does not automatically prove that its caption names the right town or date. A real incident does not automatically establish the claimed number of victims.

Separating these questions is a practical way to avoid giving an uncertain account more confidence than it deserves.

Begin with the earliest accessible source. Record the publication time, the event time if known, and the original wording.

Follow a screenshot to the report it supposedly quotes. Ask whether another account adds independent evidence or merely repeats the same statement.

If a key link is missing, say what remains unverified instead of filling the gap with an assumption.

Read the footnotes before comparing totals

OCHA’s casualty database explains that its entries ordinarily require validation from at least two independent, reliable sources, while noting an exception for information on Israeli injuries. Its definitions also specify what incidents and injuries are included.

A carefully maintained database is therefore still a defined subset of events, rather than a complete account of every kind of harm.

The same page makes a crucial distinction: casualties from the Gaza and Israel hostilities beginning October 7, 2023, will enter that database after independent verification. Reported figures meanwhile appear in separate humanitarian updates and snapshots.

Two OCHA pages can consequently show different coverage without contradicting each other. The question is whether the two figures share the same period, geography, categories and verification standard.

A revision can reflect more information

OHCHR’s July 2026 Ukraine report, published August 12, explains that limited information in occupied territory makes verification harder and that actual civilian casualties there are likely higher than its verified figures. This is a reason to preserve labels such as ‘reported’ and ‘verified minimum.’

When a later release changes an earlier count, check its explanation before assuming that every additional case is a new incident.

The same discipline applies to a subtotal. Deaths, injuries, missing people, identified victims and people displaced measure different things.

Before calculating a percentage or adding numbers, write down the denominator and ask whether categories overlap. If one source counts people and another counts movements, adding them produces an impressive-looking result with no clear meaning.

Check the role of the organization speaking

In its October 8, 2025, explanation of misinformation, the ICRC describes confidential dialogue and humanitarian access as central to its work. It also warns that false narratives can endanger people receiving aid and staff delivering it.

Its description is an organizational account, useful for understanding its role, rather than independent confirmation of every claim about a conflict.

For images and video, compare the original upload with the version being shared, inspect whether the caption has changed, and seek corroboration for place and time. Do not expose private identifying details while asking others to verify a scene.

For numbers, share the source link and its caveat together. This method will sometimes leave a claim unresolved.

An explicit uncertainty is more informative than a confident statement whose supporting record cannot be found.