	author:	Scilla Alecci	institution:	International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ)	¿porque no los dos?
	tl;dr	The article summarizes an ICIJ investigation alleging that ICBC used international lending to advance China’s political and strategic interests, sometimes overriding financial risks and compliance concerns. Drawing on 4.8 million confidential records and partner reporting, it describes deals involving infrastructure, natural resources, technology and military-linked companies across four continents. It also examines relationships involving businesses connected to sanctioned Belarusian interests. ICBC did not respond to requests for comment; Zoomlion said it complies with applicable laws.
	deeper:	Specific document quotations, financial figures, named sources and links to partner reporting give the article substantial evidentiary support. It acknowledges an unknown loan outcome, includes Zoomlion’s response and notes unanswered requests for comment. However, phrases such as “notoriously secretive” and the consistently geopolitical framing sometimes blur commercial strategy with political intent. Alternative explanations receive limited attention. Its emphasis on transparency and regulatory accountability does not establish a clear left-right agenda. This is a well-supported investigative roundup, although the underlying records cannot be independently checked from these screenshots.
media:

	author:	Unknown	institution:	International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ)	¿porque no los dos?
	tl;dr	ICIJ’s China Capital investigation reports that ICBC’s London operations prioritized Chinese strategic interests and profitable clients despite internal warnings about corruption, money laundering and sanctions risks. Drawing on 4.8 million records, it examines relationships involving Azerbaijan’s ruling family, Angola’s oil company, a Sierra Leone port project, Kuwaiti payments and Russian and Belarusian businesses. The article distinguishes some internal policy breaches from legal sanctions violations. China rejects claims of politically motivated, opaque lending; several companies deny wrongdoing, while ICBC did not respond.
	deeper:	Extensive internal quotations, specific transactions, expert analysis and responses from accused parties support strong investigative quality. The reporting acknowledges important limits: Nornickel itself is not sanctioned, some plans may never have happened, and the Sierra Leone loan was not disbursed. However, phrases such as “banking kleptocrats” and broad geopolitical conclusions give it a prosecutorial tone. Its affirmative emphasis is financial transparency and accountability, not a clear left-right agenda. The screenshots do not independently establish the authenticity or completeness of the underlying records.
media:

	author:	Nicole Sadek	institution:	International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ)	¿porque no los dos?
	tl;dr	An ICIJ report says India is tightening “track and trace” rules for cancer drugs after a counterfeit Keytruda scandal exposed how high prices and scarcity can be exploited. New requirements include mandatory QR codes and unit-level identifiers (e.g., unique code, manufacture/expiry dates, manufacturer details) for medicines sold in India, including some imports. The story cites Health Ministry statements, prior investigations with The Indian Express, and a 2024 case in New Delhi involving refilled vials and cross-border impacts (including Nepal).
	deeper:	The piece is largely factual and specific (dates, agencies, prior case details, and described regulatory changes). Its framing emphasizes patient harm, high pricing, and public-interest accountability—common in investigative health reporting—without heavy ideological rhetoric. It relies on official sources and earlier documented investigations, but offers limited space for countervailing views from manufacturers or enforcement challenges beyond brief mentions (e.g., “foolproof” concerns). Overall, it is clear, well-sourced, and informative.
media:

	author:	Sylvia Alecci	institution:	International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ)	¿porque no los dos?
	tl;dr	An ICIJ article reports Taiwan’s Justice Ministry Investigation Bureau has charged four executives tied to a local firm, allegedly used by China-linked cyber operators, for assisting in espionage targeting ICIJ and Citizen Lab. The piece says the campaign involved phishing emails, fake “cooperation invitations,” and possibly malware delivery aimed at journalists, NGOs, and officials. It notes Citizen Lab’s findings on suspicious emails and suggests some content may have been generated with little oversight, while framing the operation as directed by China’s military intelligence.
	deeper:	The reporting is largely evidence-driven (official Taiwanese statements, prior Citizen Lab research, and ICIJ’s firsthand experiences). It uses assertive language about Chinese direction, but attributes key claims to authorities and researchers rather than presenting them as pure fact. Limited space is given to responses from accused parties or Chinese authorities, which slightly narrows perspective. Overall structure, sourcing, and specificity are strong, though some allegations depend on intelligence/attribution that readers can’t independently verify.
media:

#icij