A series of manually reviewed directed source pairs. No network centrality scores, unsourced arrows, coordination inferences or browser-side scraping.
An arrow indicates a documented temporal and source relationship stated in the table, NOT that one actor directed another, agreed politically, or intentionally copied a claim.
Graph is explanatory, not algorithmically inferred. Every arrow is individually identified with dated endpoint sources in the evidence table below. Keyboard and non-visual readers may use the full text links.
Graph is explanatory, not algorithmically inferred. Every arrow is individually identified with dated endpoint sources in the evidence table below. Keyboard and non-visual readers may use the full text links.
Graph is explanatory, not algorithmically inferred. Every arrow is individually identified with dated endpoint sources in the evidence table below. Keyboard and non-visual readers may use the full text links.
Graph is explanatory, not algorithmically inferred. Every arrow is individually identified with dated endpoint sources in the evidence table below. Keyboard and non-visual readers may use the full text links.
Search each reviewed arrow by its exact endpoints, topic and relationship type. This filters already approved documentary links; no new inference is generated.
Reuters explicitly names Labor Department CPI as source of 9.1%.
What was inspected: Reuters paragraph reporting Labor Department 9.1%
What the link does not establish: Not proof of secret editorial instructions or president-caused inflation.
Endpoint evidence: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2022-07-13), Reuters, syndicated at Euronews (2022-07-13)Guardian discusses the released CPI figure the same day.
What was inspected: Guardian headline and article inflation breakdown compared with BLS release
What the link does not establish: No evidence Guardian copied Reuters; both can consult BLS.
Endpoint evidence: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2022-07-13), The Guardian (2022-07-13)AP later references the 9.1% June 2022 peak as historical context.
What was inspected: AP Jan 26 2023 background paragraph; BLS published June 2022 data
What the link does not establish: No direct link to any July 2022 outlet text established.
Endpoint evidence: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2022-07-13), Associated Press (2023-01-26)CBS reports the official count and event.
What was inspected: CBS 49–50 opening paragraph; Senate Roll Call 234
What the link does not establish: No evidence CBS was directed to write a particular headline.
Endpoint evidence: United States Senate (2026-09-15), CBS News (2026-09-15)CoinDesk explicitly reports the procedural 49–50 tally.
What was inspected: CoinDesk paragraph describing procedural motion
What the link does not establish: No proof the vote was final passage or uniquely caused stock prices.
Endpoint evidence: United States Senate (2026-09-15), CoinDesk (2026-09-15)Galaxy names Lummis and repeats her “never truly serious” characterization.
What was inspected: Galaxy Sept 18 paragraph quoting Lummis; Lummis Sept 15 office release
What the link does not establish: One attributed quote does not establish coordination among actors or all media outlets.
Endpoint evidence: Office of U.S. Senator Cynthia Lummis (2026-09-15), Galaxy Research (2026-09-18)The official result precedes Lummis’s attributed political analysis of that event.
What was inspected: Office press release notes Motion to Proceed failed; Senate roll call
What the link does not establish: Interpretation is an opinion about motives, not a source-certified ballot item.
Endpoint evidence: United States Senate (2026-09-15), Office of U.S. Senator Cynthia Lummis (2026-09-15)Galaxy accurately identifies the procedural motion while making an erroneous senator-state attribution elsewhere.
What was inspected: Galaxy research first paragraph versus Senate tally and verified directory
What the link does not establish: The media source can contain errors even if the cited 49–50 tally is accurate.
Endpoint evidence: United States Senate (2026-09-15), Galaxy Research (2026-09-18)CBS explicitly attributes the new fourth incident to Anthropic’s own assessment.
What was inspected: CBS article opening and company report introduction
What the link does not establish: Neither direct copying nor model-internal artifact verification is proven.
Endpoint evidence: Anthropic (2026-09-09), CBS News (2026-09-09)SecurityWeek attributes incident facts and search procedure to Anthropic’s publication.
What was inspected: SecurityWeek Sep 10 opening and Anthropic report
What the link does not establish: Not a claim of newsroom cooperation or executive criminal guilt.
Endpoint evidence: Anthropic (2026-09-09), SecurityWeek (2026-09-10)AP discusses the FTC proposal and attributes allegations to the regulator.
What was inspected: AP May 2 report and original FTC release
What the link does not establish: Not a finding of criminal guilt.
Endpoint evidence: Federal Trade Commission (2024-05-02), Associated Press original report (2024-05-02)Fortune explicitly credits the Associated Press as the author of its reproduced account.
What was inspected: Fortune byline “By The Associated Press”; AP original headline and event
What the link does not establish: A credited licensed reuse is not secret influence.
Endpoint evidence: Associated Press original report (2024-05-02), Fortune (credited Associated Press) (2024-05-02)The agency finalized its previously announced consent measure in January 2025.
What was inspected: FTC January release explicitly refers back to May 2024 action
What the link does not establish: Not evidence of adjudicated criminal guilt.
Endpoint evidence: Federal Trade Commission (2024-05-02), Federal Trade Commission (2025-01-17)The FTC set aside the operative January 2025 final order.
What was inspected: July 17 FTC release expressly identifies January order and deficiencies
What the link does not establish: Not evidence that earlier media knowingly spread falsehoods.
Endpoint evidence: Federal Trade Commission (2025-01-17), Federal Trade Commission (2025-07-17)