The manual of disinformation by Gustavo Petro

Gustavo Petro, former president of Colombia, has been found to have disseminated misinformation in at least 126 instances during his four years in office, according to a detailed analysis conducted by the Fact-Checking Team at La Silla Vacía. Of these, 73 percent were shared through his account on the social media platform X, which has become his primary tool for spreading claims. The findings reveal that Petro’s statements included 56 outright false claims, 44 misleading ones, and 18 that were considered debatable. Only 20.4 percent of his assertions were verified as accurate or mostly accurate with caveats. The data shows that Petro frequently used X to spread misinformation, accounting for 73 percent of all instances of false information. A further 23.7 percent occurred during public speeches, many of which took place on July 20 before the Congress. These moments often coincided with key decisions or policy announcements, suggesting a strategic pattern in how he communicated his messages. One recurring theme in Petro's rhetoric was the promotion of doubts about the integrity of Colombia’s electoral system. From 2022 onwards, he repeatedly warned about potential fraud, especially targeting Thomas Greg & Sons, a company that had long held contracts related to electoral logistics. In a notable post from 2024, Petro suggested the possibility of a “monumental fraud” being orchestrated by this firm. He later extended these concerns to the upcoming 2026 presidential election, using similar language to frame his political narrative. Despite these allegations, no national or international authority has validated Petro’s claims, nor have officials within his own administration supported them. His arguments mirror those made by other leaders such as Donald Trump in the United States and Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, who similarly constructed narratives around alleged electoral frauds. Petro’s misinformation spanned multiple areas, including health care reforms, pension policies, land reforms, and increases in the minimum wage. He often repeated these claims during critical times for his agenda, reinforcing his position while undermining opponents. For instance, he frequently compared his government’s achievements to those of his predecessor, Ivan Duque, even when the comparisons lacked factual accuracy. In matters of security, Petro claimed that drug seizures under his administration exceeded those recorded under Duque’s government during the same period in 2019. However, this comparison failed to consider seasonal variations in drug trafficking activities, which can significantly affect annual statistics. Petro’s approach to spreading doubt about the electoral process continued after the 2022 elections, where he won power. He falsely asserted that voter rolls had been artificially inflated, that the voting software had been altered, and that individual ballots could be changed after they were published. He also pointed to irregularities in voting patterns that supposedly indicated machine-like behavior, despite no evidence supporting these claims. Recently, Petro has reiterated these points, citing supposed proof of fraud on the official website of electoral witnesses and pointing to irregular voting patterns as evidence of manipulation. All of these allegations have been debunked by independent verification efforts. Petro’s campaign of doubt began as early as 2018, following his loss in the presidential election, and continued into 2022 when he won using the very system he now questions. During his presidency, he leveraged state media and public platforms to amplify his message, achieving a level of influence previously unattained. This strategy allowed him to reinforce his accomplishments while simultaneously casting shadows over his predecessors' legacies. His use of misinformation appears to be part of a broader effort to shape public perception in support of his political objectives. As he continues to push forward with his agenda, the focus will remain on whether his claims will gain traction among the electorate or face continued scrutiny from fact-checking organizations and legal authorities.