The Artemis II mission has put the moon back in the news, with stunning images of our satellite beamed back to Earth. The photos are awe-inducing.

But are they real? After all, the moon has been a bugaboo of conspiracy theorists since the “alleged” moon landing of 1969; add in the internet and AI, and we are awash in fake moonslop.

So The Standard called up Hany Farid, one of the world’s leading image-verification experts. A UC Berkeley professor and cofounder of the image-verification company GetReal, Farid has spent more than a decade pioneering image verification in an increasingly digitized world. 

Here, he tells us how to know if you’re really looking at the moon.

This conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

The Artemis mission is getting everyone  excited about the moon again. But in my work chat, someone shared an insane and amazing image they said was from the Artemis space mission. Then another colleague said it was fake. I thought they were making a meta conspiracy joke about the moon landing hoax theories, but everyone said it was really fake.

This is the world we live in, by the way, where you can’t tell if something is fake.

Last week I posted a picture of my new puppy to Instagram, and three people asked if it was AI. We don’t believe anything anymore.

This is the new reality. It used to be, “Pics, or it didn’t happen.” Now that doesn’t work. Now it’s, “Is it AI?” Because the reality is that for most of us, our personal and professional interactions are all happening on 8 square inches of a screen, and over the last few years, things have gotten really weird. It’s always been the case that you could lie with photographs and sound and video, but not the way we can now. What used to require skill, time, and effort is now a keyboard and a Wi-Fi connection away. Anybody can go to any of a dozen services, type in “Make me an image of Artemis,” and boom. And of course, not only can we create this content, but social media is gleefully amplifying this AI slop, because it is engaging, almost by design.

And the images that get tons of comments saying, “This is AI” — those tell the algorithm to share it more.

Yes, it’s a vicious cycle. Mark Zuckerberg is laughing all the way to the bank because people keep clicking on this stuff, he keeps selling ads, and what does he care if he’s slopifying the world?

There used to be tried-and-true ways to spot fakes during a news event. I used to work on a misinformation research team, and we’d tell people: If images are suddenly flooding in from a war zone, people are often really sharing video game footage — think critically about whether they’d even have cell service there. But that advice, which I was giving even three years ago, is out of date now.

It’s not just that the advice from three years ago doesn’t work. The advice from three months ago doesn’t work. This space is moving so unbelievably fast. And this is really important, because at some point you’re going to ask me what viewers can do — and I could tell you a few things, but the problem is in three weeks or three months, they won’t be useful anymore. So I’m going to cut to the chase: People have to stop getting their news and information from social media. It’s not what it’s designed for. If you want to understand what’s happening with Artemis, go to NASA’s website. They have beautiful photos there.

And we’ve lost all agency. We’re not saying, “This is what I want to see.” We’re being force-fed.

Right, you’re being force-fed things like some weird dystopian future. So my real answer to anybody who wants to know what is happening in the Middle East, what is happening in Venezuela, what is happening in Minnesota, what is happening at NASA: Go to the goddamn websites. Get off social media. It’s arguably designed for the exact opposite — it’s really good at amplifying misinformation and disinformation and things that are meant to just keep you clicking like a little monkey.

The other advice I used to give — which feels pointless to repeat since no one listened before — was do not share things on social media during breaking news events. Does that apply for someone who went on Instagram to look at their friend’s wedding photos but now sees a moon image in their feed?

Yes. I’ve been saying the same thing for more than 10 years, and I don’t think the advice works. People click on clickbait because they’re moving fast, and they’re not thinking, “Oh, I’m part of the problem.” But every time you click on that fake moon image, or you like it, or you share it, you are part of the problem. It is death by a thousand cuts.

Let’s look at some images. This one was posted on X: a colorful image of the moon that the tweet claims was taken by Artemis II.

I’ve seen this one going around. What makes these types of images very difficult is that we have no experience with what this should look like. So here’s what I would do: take that image and do a reverse image search and see if you can track down where it came from. 

It looks like it’s being shared by a news channel.

Do you actually know it’s a news channel? I don’t know what K13 is, and the verified check mark doesn’t mean anything anymore. There’s no geometry to analyze, no shadows, no faces — nothing. This is almost the hardest case imaginable. I would look up K13 News, see what else they’re posting, verify whether it’s a real outlet. And sites like Snopes and FactCheck are really good at debunking this stuff quickly. If you go to Snopes right now and type “Artemis,” they’ll give you a list of everything that’s been faked.

[A reverse image search suggests this is a color-corrected photo of the moon taken in October 2025, with nothing to do with the Artemis II mission. This is an example of what misinformation researchers call “recontextualized media. (opens in new tab)”]

Another one: A video claims to show Artemis II flying by the moon. In the comments, people are debating the science: “It’s too bright,” “They were closer than that.” I was thinking: Shouldn’t they just be looking at the source?

We have no context here. I’m not an astronomer; I’m not a physicist. If this were an earthbound video, there are lots of things I could analyze. But here, all I can tell for sure is that it is really beautiful and mesmerizing. I would assume it’s fake unless I also see it on the NASA website.

That’s what I’m hearing from you: When it comes to the moon, we as casual consumers don’t know enough to assess anything. It’s a data void. (opens in new tab)

We have no idea what we’re talking about! It’s bad enough dealing with content from conflict zones, where at least we have things we know, things we can analyze. Here there’s no context. There are maybe 10 people in the world who know what this thing should look like.

Here’s one that was so obviously bad that when I saw it this morning, I was deeply happy. It’s a video that appears to show a dragon on the moon.

I love truly dumb. You know what this reminds me of? Every time there’s a devastating tornado or tsunami, somebody makes a video of a shark swimming down the highway. This is the Artemis II equivalent of the shark swimming down the highway.

Final one. I want you to guess where I found the actual dumbest piece of fake moon imagery.

I gotta say Facebook. It’s gotta be Facebook.

Nailed it.

Farid: First of all, that’s awesome.

The “back side” of the moon.

Farid: Facebook wins the Ig Nobel.

This has made me feel better about not knowing whether I’m looking at the real moon or not.

It is hard. Go look for these images on The New York Times, NPR, BBC — or just go to the NASA website. The photos are beautiful. They’re high-res. You can zoom in on them. They’re so much better. What are you doing looking at this stuff on Facebook, for God’s sake?