Treat the subtitle text as an additional claim
A viewer who does not speak the audio language may naturally rely on the text. That creates a separate verification task from checking whether the person or television image is real. Full Fact has documented incorrect subtitles added to authentic footage. Familiar faces and a recognisable news setting therefore cannot settle the accuracy of the captioned translation.
Find the fuller source segment
Look for the original broadcaster or speaker’s published version, including the surrounding question and answer. Compare the actual sequence and timing so that you know it is the same passage. A different speech by the same person is not a translation check. Keep the original audio available rather than relying on a repost that has replaced or obscured it.
Use translation tools as leads, not final adjudicators
Full Fact’s guide notes that automated translation can offer an indication but is not guaranteed to capture every word or meaning. If the claim is consequential, seek a reliable published translation or qualified explanation of the actual segment. Do not turn a rough machine translation into a confident quotation attributed to the speaker.
Avoid spreading an unverified quotation
Until the wording is established, describe it as an unverified subtitle claim rather than placing it in quotation marks as fact. If the subtitles are shown to be false, link the correction and source passage. There is no need to reproduce the invented statement repeatedly. Keeping picture authenticity and translation accuracy separate helps prevent a real recording becoming evidence for words that were never spoken.
Questions, answered
Does a broadcaster logo authenticate added subtitles?
No. The translation is a separate claim.
Can automated translation always settle a disputed quote?
No. Treat it as an initial aid and verify consequential wording.