Skip to content
Pasa un enlace a Turing

Analysis of the article

APPS acusa de lucro a organizadores de nueva marcha del Orgullo LGBTTTIQ+ en Puebla

Urban · published on May 28, 2025

The most important

¿Qué pasó?

Good news for the community

It gives the community positive visibility.

Lo dice Turing al leer la nota.

¿Cómo lo contó el medio?

Very good

La nota usa un lenguaje respetuoso. Tiene perspectiva de género y de derechos: habla de diversidad sexual, nombra a la población lgbtttiqanb+, da voz a colectivos y activistas.

¿Qué puedo hacer?

Ver la nota marcada Leer en urbanopuebla.com.mx PDF
Share

Share this analysis

X Facebook Threads WhatsApp

Guardamos una prueba de que existió tal como la leímos · Reference number CC-6GUP-B6N4

On this page
  1. The most important
  2. La nota marcada
  3. Qué cambiar y qué hace bien
  4. ¿Es cierto lo que dice?
  5. See a mistake?
  6. Para saber más

La nota marcada

Los párrafos donde encontramos algo

Lo subrayado es la forma de nombrar. Toca una marca para ver por qué. No copiamos la nota completa.

Urban urbanopuebla.com.mx

By Jaime López ·

abc What it does well abc Inclusive language

APPS acusa de lucro a organizadores de nueva marcha del Orgullo LGBTTTIQ+ en Puebla

La dirigencia estatal del collective APPS acusó que the people que anunciaron una nueva movilización del Orgullo LGBTTTIQ+ en Puebla lucraron en años anteriores con las marchas de la sexual diversity.

Precisó que lo anterior ocurrió cuando encabezaron o tenían bajo su cargo la tradicional Marcha del Orgullo LGBTTTIQ, que comienza su recorrido en el parque Juárez, frente a Plaza Dorada.

Mediante sus redes sociales, Flores Serrano del collective APPS indicó que quería mantenerse al margen de la confrontación con la nueva marcha, pero aseguró que se vio obligada por las presuntas acusaciones que han hecho en contra de ella y su equipo de trabajo.

Es oportuno agregar que la activist - sexual diversity no dio nombres en concreto y tampoco reiteró su señalamiento hacia Betucky Camacho, directora de Diversidad Sexual en el estado, a quien anteriormente acusó de tratar de sabotear su movilización.

Será el 14 de junio cuando se realice la nueva marcha del Orgullo LGBTTTIQ, con recorrido de la Avenida Juárez al Zócalo de Puebla, mientras que una semana después tocará el turno a la manifestación del collective Apps, que sale del Parque Juárez al Zócalo.

Qué cambiar y qué hace bien

What it does well

Cómo se calculó el 100 está en Para saber más.

Very good

  • With a gender perspective
  • Respectful

La nota usa un lenguaje respetuoso. Tiene perspectiva de género y de derechos: habla de diversidad sexual, nombra a la población lgbtttiqanb+, da voz a colectivos y activistas.

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

Text by 2025 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 No flags
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 4 strengths
Inclusive language 100%
How we arrived at 100 out of 100
  1. Every article starts with100
  2. Gender and rights perspective+8
  3. Rating (between 0 and 100, with rounding and caps by category)100

Who does it listen to?

  • AuthoritiesNo
  • Family, friends and neighborsNo
  • Collectives and organizations1 time
  • ExpertsNo

What it does well

  • Talks about sexual diversity
  • Names the LGBTTTIQANB+ population
  • Gives a voice to collectives and activists
  • Respects the presumption of innocence

¿Es cierto lo que dice?

¿Es cierto lo que dice la nota?

Turing compara las cifras, leyes y casos que menciona con lo que tenemos documentado. No decimos «falso»: si algo no cuadra, te enseñamos la evidencia.

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

See a mistake?

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

Un dato está mal

Una persona, una fecha, una cifra o una postura que no corresponde. Escríbenos y lo revisamos.

Avisar de un dato

Soy del medio

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

Para saber más

Cómo se calculó el 100Lo que resta y lo que suma, la versión de Turing y si ayudó una IA

Se ve en «Qué cambiar y qué hace bien».

The proofCopia guardada con folio CC-6GUP-B6N4, su certificado y su valor legal

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-6GUP-B6N4

Valid and verifiable Sealed on November 12, 2026, 14:42:43 (Central Mexico time)

Código QR del certificado CC-6GUP-B6N4 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 12, 2026, 14:42:43 (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 It is being saved; the link appears once we confirm it exists.
  5. 5. Monitoring We check it from time to time to know if it gets deleted.

INTERNET ARCHIVE · Wayback Machine

Being saved on archive.org

Turing has already sent it. The link to the copy appears here as soon as we confirm in the archive.org index that it really exists (it may take a few hours).

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 0cbef7aabd1d43ebb32f3fa44b3f56314a09011e491f25d05b7eec64cf3f7bed

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.

Note detailsMedio, fechas y versiones guardadas

Data

Outlet
Urban
Byline
Jaime López
Published
May 28, 2025
Last analyzed
November 12, 2026
Turing
2.8 (the current one)
State
Online

Saved versions

  • 100Version 1 · November 12, 2026 · 289 words

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

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.