Skip to content
Longterm Wiki
Index
Fact·f_4t8WFcs3XE·Fact

Access Now — campaign: Led coalition of 110+ civil society organizations in EU AI Act advocacy on transparency safeguards

Verdictunverifiable95%
2 checks · 1 src · 4/14/2026

The source page is about Access Now's 'Ban Biometric Surveillance' campaign and documents a 200+ organization coalition around that specific campaign. The claim references a different coalition (110+ organizations focused on EU AI Act advocacy on transparency safeguards). While the additional context states the 110+ figure 'specifically refers to the AI Act advocacy coalition,' the provided source text does not contain any information about an EU AI Act advocacy coalition, its size, or its focus on transparency safeguards. The source is outdated (last updated December 21, 2021) and does not address the specific claim about EU AI Act advocacy. This is a case of wrong source relevance—the source discusses the biometric surveillance campaign, not the EU AI Act advocacy work.

Our claim

entire record
Subject
Access Now
Value
Led coalition of 110+ civil society organizations in EU AI Act advocacy on transparency safeguards
As Of
2024
Notes
Access Now led major civil society coalition on EU AI Act. The ban-biometric-surveillance campaign page documents their 200+ org coalition work; the 110+ figure specifically refers to the AI Act advocacy coalition.

Source evidence

1 src · 2 checks
unverifiable95%primaryHaiku 4.5 · 4/14/2026

NoteThe source page is about Access Now's 'Ban Biometric Surveillance' campaign and documents a 200+ organization coalition around that specific campaign. The claim references a different coalition (110+ organizations focused on EU AI Act advocacy on transparency safeguards). While the additional context states the 110+ figure 'specifically refers to the AI Act advocacy coalition,' the provided source text does not contain any information about an EU AI Act advocacy coalition, its size, or its focus on transparency safeguards. The source is outdated (last updated December 21, 2021) and does not address the specific claim about EU AI Act advocacy. This is a case of wrong source relevance—the source discusses the biometric surveillance campaign, not the EU AI Act advocacy work.

unverifiable95%primaryHaiku 3 · 3/30/2026

NoteThe source URL points to the Ban Biometric Surveillance campaign page, but the excerpt provided only shows the page's navigation menu, form fields, and structural elements—not the actual campaign content. While the additional context states that the 110+ figure 'specifically refers to the AI Act advocacy coalition' (distinct from the 200+ biometric surveillance coalition), the provided source text does not contain any information about either coalition size, EU AI Act advocacy, or transparency safeguards. To verify this claim, the actual campaign page content would need to be examined, not just its header/navigation structure.

Case № f_4t8WFcs3XEFiled 4/14/2026Confidence 95%