Skip to content

Analysis of the article

"Yo no la denuncié por criticarme en WhatsApp", señala la morenista Almendra Negrete

El Economista · published on March 16, 2026

The most important

What happened?

Informative news

It informs without a clear event for or against.

Turing says this when he reads the note.

How did the media report it?

Very good

The article uses respectful language.

What Can I Do?

What they did well and what they did wrong Leer la nota completa en eleconomista.com.mx PDF
Share

Share this analysis

X Facebook Threads WhatsApp

We keep proof that it existed as we read it · Reference number CC-QUTU-2XR8

Preliminary analysis: Turing has not yet finished reviewing this note and will complete it as soon as possible.

On this page
  1. The most important
  2. What they did well and what they did wrong
  3. What to change and what is working well
  4. "It's true what he says." 3
  5. See a mistake?
  6. Find out more

The note, in summary

What they did well and what they did wrong

0 cosas que hizo mal · 2 que hizo bien

Lo resume Turing con su análisis de la nota. No copiamos la nota: abajo van solo las frases que lo explican y el enlace para leerla completa en El Economista.

What you did well

  • Talks about sexual diversity
  • Human rights approach

and what they did wrong.

Nothing to correct in the way you name things.

The phrases Turing highlighted

Citas breves de la nota de El Economista, para explicar el análisis. Toca una marca para ver por qué.

El Economista eleconomista.com.mx

"Yo no la denuncié por criticarme en WhatsApp", señala la morenista Almendra Negrete

By Maritza Pérez ·

abc What it does well «…» Direct quote

… fueron obtenidas legalmente. La también Secretaria Nacional de Diversidad Sexual de Morena, sostiene que su denuncia se ha politizado, ya que asegura …

… que demostrar dos veces nuestras capacidades. Y si eres de la sexual diversity, tres veces. Me jugó en contra porque todo el mundo asume que todos …

Would you like to read the full article? Está en la página de El Economista. Así también apoyas al medio que la publicó.

Leer en eleconomista.com.mx

What to change and what is working well

What it does well

Nada que corregir · 2 que hace bien

How 100 was calculated is in Find out more.

Very good

  • Respectful

The article uses respectful language.

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

Text by 2026 Date of publication

Analyzed with Turing v3.1 · 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 2 strengths
Inclusive language Not applicable
How we arrived at 100 out of 100
  1. Every article starts with100
  2. Gender and rights perspective+4
  3. Rating (between 0 and 100, with rounding and caps by category)100

Turing related it to what the site already knows

Who does it listen to?

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

What it does well

  • Talks about sexual diversity
  • Human rights approach

"It's true what he says."

Is what the note says true?

3 sin comprobar

Turing compares the figures, laws, and cases it mentions with what we have documented. We don't say "false": if something doesn't add up, we show you the evidence.

3 things we still can't verify

  1. The article

    «Almendra Negrete Sánchez, diputada local con licencia de Morena, y quien actualmente está envuelta en una controversia al haber denunciado a Emma Zermeño López, colaboradora de la Secretaría de las Mujeres de Sinaloa, por violencia política y acoso, usando como parte de las pruebas conversaciones de WhatsApp; afirmó que este caso no se trata de censura ni busca atentar contra la libertad de expres»

    We still can't verify it

    It isn’t a figure, a law, a statement or a case we can compare with our records.

    See the evidence

  2. The article

    «De igual forma defendió que este proceso legal sólo tiene como fin frenar el acoso y los ataques que realizó por más de un año y medio Zermeño López, a quien afirma no conocer ni haber cruzado palabra.»

    We still can't verify it

    It isn’t a figure, a law, a statement or a case we can compare with our records.

    See the evidence

  3. The article

    «Por lo que ante las amenazas, dijo, decidió interponer una denuncia.»

    We still can't verify it

    It isn’t a figure, a law, a statement or a case we can compare with our records.

    See the evidence

Full Report: VR-2026-ZRBG3H · PDF. Turing compares with what we have documented (a minimum count).

See a mistake?

Correct Turing or request a review

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

One piece of information is incorrect

A person, a date, a figure, or a position that doesn't match. Write to us and we'll check it out.

Report a data point

I'm the middle child

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

Find out more

How 100 was calculatedWhat remains and what is added, the Turing version, and whether an AI helped

This can be seen in “What to change and what is being done well.”

The proofCopia guardada con folio CC-QUTU-2XR8, 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-QUTU-2XR8

Valid and verifiable Sealed on November 14, 2026, 05:58:35 (Central Mexico time)

Código QR del certificado CC-QUTU-2XR8 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 14, 2026, 05:58:35 (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 It was still online on November 14, 2026. We check it from time to time.

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 801b7740d861806da4d3f077fba3f5efff1b7b4d09ee8b1dcfb4121e559c6f99

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.

In the Legislatures and Governments sectionThe initiative and the legislators that Turing linked to the note

Congresses and governments

The article is about the work of a congress. It does not name any legislator from the directory, but it does name other voices that take or avoid taking a position; they are below.

Other voices in the article

  • Party leadership

    Morena Neutral or ambiguous Speaks respectfully

    “la también Secretaria Nacional de Diversidad Sexual de Morena”

    It neither adds nor takes off points: only legislators have a rating.

What each person said is published on their record only if it passes a verification: the quote is in the article, it is that person, and a second AI review agrees. Whatever does not pass is decided by a third AI review, without waiting for the team, which can correct any position. Report an error

Note detailsMedium, dates, and saved versions

Data

Byline
Maritza Pérez
Published
March 16, 2026
Last analyzed
November 14, 2026
Turing
3.1 (the current one)
State
Online
Place of the events
Mexico

Saved versions

  • 100Version 1 · November 14, 2026 · 899 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.