Skip to content
Turing

Analysis of the article

«EL RING DE LOS DEBATES»: Crímenes de odio

Woman is More - · published on May 21, 2018

How is it written?

Very good writing

La nota usa un lenguaje respetuoso. Tiene perspectiva de género y de derechos: nombra el crimen de odio, nombra la orientación sexual, nombra la expresión de género.

In the cross-cutting issues

Turing reads it apart from the grade: the grade measures how it is written; this shows what counts in each topic. See all issues.

Is this analysis correct?

Your answer trains Turing and improves the rating.

Yes, it's correct No, I want to correct it

To answer, you have to Sign-in: so your corrections remain in your follow-up.

Correct Turing's analysis

Published
May 21, 2018
Analyzed
November 11, 2026
State
Online
Leer en mujeresmas.com.mx PDF
Share

Share this analysis

X Facebook Threads WhatsApp

The text

Where we found it

These are the paragraphs where we find something, without reproducing the entire note. The other underlines are drafting details; the number leads to their explanation in the analysis. Tap or hover over a mark to see why we pointed at it.

Woman is More - mujeresmas.com.mx

By mujeresmas_root ·

abc Sensationalism abc What it does well abc Inclusive language «…» Direct quote

«EL RING DE LOS DEBATES»: Hate crimes

Un año después, en 2016, decidió tomarse unas vacaciones con otra chica transexual en Irapuato, Guanajuato. El 8 de julio fue el último día que se supo de ambas. Un mes estuvieron en calidad de desaparecidas hasta que el 9 de julio, en un terreno baldío de la colonia Arboledas de la ciudad de Celaya, se encontraron restos humanos calcinados2.

Como siempre ocurre, hubo una condena unánime de community development. LGBT y se consideró urgente implementar “acciones preventivas y educativas con enfoque de género y respeto a la diversidad de la identidad sexual”.

Protocolos que, en los hechos, quedan en el papel. Estas cifras lo demuestran: en los últimos cinco años, de enero de 2013 a diciembre de 2017, al menos 381 personas LGBT, o percibidas como tales, fueron asesinadas en México, allegedly por su sexual orientation, identidad o expresión de género.

En promedio, esa cifra significa 76 asesinatos por año y alrededor de seis al mes. En 2017 se registered la cifra más alta con 95 víctimas. A pesar de los avances que se han dado en los últimos años en el reconocimiento de derechos a the people LGBT en México, la violencia ejercida en su contra no ha disminuido.

Esto se concluye en el Report “Violencia, impunidad y prejuicios. Asesinatos de personas LGBTTT en México 2013-2017”, que la organización Letra S Sida, Cultura y Vida Cotidiana, A.C. dio a conocer en vísperas del Día Nacional de Lucha Contra la Homofobia, que se conmemora cada 17 de mayo.

De los groups que forman parte de la sexual diversity y genérica, las trans women (travestis, transgénero y transexuales) fueron las más afectadas por este tipo de violencia con 209 asesinatos, lo que representa 55 por ciento del total de casos; seguidas por los hombres gays u homosexuales con 158 asesinatos, equivalente a un 41 por ciento de los registros.

De enero a abril de este año, Letra S registered por lo menos 24 asesinatos de personas LGBT. De estos, 15 víctimas eran trans women, ocho eran hombres gay/homosexuales y una mujer lesbiana.

The rating

How Turing arrived at 96

What deducts from and adds to the rating, whom the article listens to, what is worth changing and what it does well.

Very good

  • With a gender perspective
  • Inclusive language
  • Respectful

La nota usa un lenguaje respetuoso. Tiene perspectiva de género y de derechos: nombra el crimen de odio, nombra la orientación sexual, nombra la expresión de género.

News articleReports facts. We check that it tells them with respect and without morbidity.

Text by 2018 Date of publication

Analyzed with Turing v2.8 · What changed

AI was not involved in this article: it was rated only by Turing’s rules.

What takes points off

The bar grows with the weight of each problem in the rating. Empty means no flags.

Derogatory terms No flags
Name and gender No flags
Blames the victim No flags
Sensationalism Leve · 2 señalamientos · resta 7
Hostile speech No flags
Imprecise terms No flags

What adds points

What the article does well. It offsets part of what takes points off, never all of it.

Gender and rights perspective 12 strengths
Inclusive language 100%

How to read this rating

  • Tiene 2 detalles amarillistas, shown below. They take points off, but they are not enough to call it a “sensationalist article”: that happens when sensationalism sets the tone of the whole article. In the statistics it counts among articles “with some sensationalist detail”.
  • Why is the rating high? What the article does well, such as naming the person’s identity, giving context or echoing the demand for justice, offsets part of what takes points off. It never erases it: an article with flags does not reach 100.
How we arrived at 96 out of 100
  1. Every article starts with100
  2. Sensationalism−7
  3. Gender and rights perspective+10
  4. Inclusive language+5
  5. What it does well offsets only part of what it loses−12
  6. Rating96

What is worth changing

  1. Yellow journalism in the headline · counts double «EL RING DE LOS DEBATES»: Crímenes de odio Capitalized words in the headline seek to alarm.
  2. Sensationalism …baldío de la colonia Arboledas de la ciudad de Celaya, se encontraron restos humanos calcinados. · Se hallaron dos cráneos, partes de fémur, brazos y mandíbulas, además de un… See it in the text Morbid detail. The cause of death is enough, if the authority made it public.

What it does well

  • Names the hate crime
  • Names sexual orientation
  • Names gender expression
  • Uses “trans woman”, “trans man” or “trans person”
  • Talks about sexual diversity
  • Names the LGBTTTIQANB+ population
  • Names discrimination
  • Mentions action protocols
  • Gives a voice to collectives and activists
  • Remembers their family and networks
  • Respects the presumption of innocence
  • Gives context with data

What it claims

What the article says, fact-checked

In analyzing the memo, Turing reviews the figures, laws, and cases he claims and what the organizations, legislators, and authorities he cites say, and compares them to Memorial, Legislative Observatory, and published verifications.

Turing is comparing what the note states with the Memorial, the Legislative Observatory and published verifications...

The proof

Certified copy

Proof that this article existed exactly as Turing read it, even if it is later changed or deleted.

Record of existence on the internet

Reference number CC-K28R-ZFQ3

Valid and verifiable Sealed on November 11, 2026, 03:14:36 (Central Mexico time)

Código QR del certificado CC-K28R-ZFQ3 Scan to verify
  1. 1. Copy and digital fingerprint We saved what Turing read and took its SHA-256 fingerprint.
  2. 2. RFC 3161 timestamp An independent third party (FreeTSA) signed the fingerprint on November 11, 2026, 03:14:36 (Central Mexico time).
  3. 3. Anchored in Bitcoin The fingerprint is in the OpenTimestamps calendars; it will be in a Bitcoin block within a few hours.
  4. 4. Copy at Internet Archive Saved on November 11, 2026 on servers that are not ours. See the copy
  5. 5. Monitoring It was still online on November 11, 2026. We check it from time to time.

INTERNET ARCHIVE · Wayback Machine

Backed up on archive.org

Internet Archive, an independent digital library, saved its own copy on its servers on November 11, 2026, 09:14 (UTC). We check its index to confirm it exists before showing it here.

Why does this make it authentic?
  • It is an independent witness. Internet Archive is a non-profit digital library that has preserved the web since 1996. It has no ties to Memoria y Resistencia or to whoever published the content.
  • The copy is theirs, not ours. Their own system captures it, stores it on their servers and stamps it with their own date and time. Neither we nor the publisher can edit it or change its date.
  • Anyone can verify it. It is at a public web.archive.org address that contains the date. Anyone can open it without asking us and compare it with our copy and its fingerprint.
  • It is a recognized reference. Journalists, researchers and lawyers often cite it to show what a page looked like on a given date.
  • Two witnesses that match. Our timestamp and the Internet Archive copy are made separately. If anyone claimed we altered the copy, the archive.org one would disprove it.

Internet Archive and its logo are trademarks of Internet Archive. We use them only to show where the copy is; this is not an endorsement by them.

SHA-256 fingerprint of the copy 5cee3348a2504827f369b8116e54978880db5862f4fe1c5c9b8d6fb8444e71d7

Turing read it directly from the public link, with no human involvement.

See the certificate Download as PDF Check another folio
What is it worth as evidence?

It is a technical proof of integrity and date: it shows that this exact content existed at that moment and was not modified afterwards. In Mexico, information in electronic media is recognized as evidence, and its weight depends on the reliability of the method used to create and keep it, on its remaining intact and on its being available for later consultation (Commercial Code, art. 1298-A; Federal Code of Civil Procedure, art. 210-A; National Code of Civil and Family Procedure, art. 348).

That is why each copy uses open standards that anyone can verify without trusting us: SHA-256 fingerprint, third-party RFC 3161 timestamp, OpenTimestamps on Bitcoin and the independent Internet Archive copy.

It is not a notarial certification of facts or a NOM-151 preservation certificate. If you need it for a lawsuit, the same fingerprint can be backed by them. Write to us with the folio.

Record

About the note

Data

Byline
mujeresmas_root
Published
May 21, 2018
Last analyzed
November 11, 2026
Turing
2.8 (the current one)
State
Online
Place of the events
Mexico

Saved versions

  • 96Version 1 · November 11, 2026 · 806 words

Every time someone analyzes the article, we read it again. If the outlet changed it, we save a new version and compare.

Are you from the outlet?

If you work at the outlet or wrote the article and think the analysis has an error, request a review: we give you a reference number and reply in writing within 10 business days.

Request a review

Keep exploring

Preparing your PDF… We are putting together the analysis with the underlined text and the QR code.

Made by and for the community

This tool is free because someone donated before you

We receive no government funding. Your donation helps us keep reviewing how the press names LGBTTTIQANB+ people and keep the memory of each case alive.

Donate $100 once

Secure payment with Stripe through Nodo Cívico, the organization behind Memoria y Resistencia.

See all options

The analysis is automatic: it can be wrong with irony, with quotes the article criticizes or with very short texts. To protect the people in the cases, their legal name does not appear on this page. How we rate.