Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

Razones de Cuba

@RazonesdeCuba

On this record: Topic · Observations · Also posting the same content · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

2,169subscribers

-4 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001473675235
TypeChannel
Username@RazonesdeCuba
CreatedBetween 1 April 2019 and 31 August 2021— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live10 August 2026
Measurements held3
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 10 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/RazonesdeCuba

Topic

Politics & activism — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 11 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 68% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.

Observations

These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.

Content that also appears on other registered channels

Posts published here appear word for word on 1 other registered channel. They sit inside a group of 4 channels that share the same post bodies with each other. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.

Matching posts — open both and compare (6 of the pairs behind the counts below)
Posted firstThenOverlapGap
@RazonesdeCuba/6316 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 13:51 UTC@ManicatoGeopol/419977 Aug 2026, 15:16 UTC1.0085 minutes
@RazonesdeCuba/6321 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 13:53 UTC@ManicatoGeopol/420027 Aug 2026, 15:16 UTC1.0083 minutes
@RazonesdeCuba/6322 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 13:55 UTC@ManicatoGeopol/420037 Aug 2026, 15:16 UTC1.0081 minutes
@RazonesdeCuba/6323 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 13:57 UTC@ManicatoGeopol/420047 Aug 2026, 15:16 UTC1.0079 minutes
@RazonesdeCuba/6324 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 13:58 UTC@ManicatoGeopol/420057 Aug 2026, 15:16 UTC1.0078 minutes
@RazonesdeCuba/6325 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 14:01 UTC@ManicatoGeopol/420067 Aug 2026, 15:16 UTC1.0074 minutes
Every channel this entry shares post bodies with
ChannelMatching postsText overlapTypical gapPublished first
@ManicatoGeopol6 (6/6 hand-verifiable sample passed)1.0080 minutesthis entry (60)

Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.

What this cannot establish

MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.

Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. None of the 0 matches recorded here fall after that date, so for this entry we cannot say whether any of them carried a credit. The duplication is measured; the absence of attribution is not.

“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 25 comparable posts for this entry, running 2 July 2026 to 7 August 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.

The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.

  • Verbatim republication has three causes and the text separates only two: a clone/mirror, unattributed copy-paste, or BOTH channels copying a common third source that neither attributes. The spread filter (content held by at most 8 channels) reduces the third and does not remove it.
  • 'Earliest' means earliest IN THIS CORPUS. A channel ingested one page deep will look younger than a neighbour ingested in full; corpus_coverage above is there to be checked before the direction is believed.
  • shared_verified_est extrapolates the sampled pass rate over the full narrow match count; sampled/passed are the numbers actually measured.
  • Absence of a forward header is not proof of intent: Telegram lets a channel disable forward attribution, and a credit written in the body is not parsed as attribution here (mention_edge_either_way above is the closest available signal).

Across the whole group of 4, the earliest publisher we hold is @tass_es. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.

Recorded under the key clone_source, last confirmed 8 August 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.

Also posting the same content

This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 3 other registered channels, found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register. That matching has been checked by hand against the live Telegram pages and found reliable — 0 wrong of 45 pairs re-read.

Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown. The same hand-check found that reading wrong 18 of 45 times — 60%, no better than a coin flip — because it depends on how deep our own crawl happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Word-for-word matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.

Growth

2,1692,1752,1726 August 2026 — 2,173 subscribers7 August 2026 — 2,175 subscribers10 August 2026 — 2,169 subscribers6 August 202610 August 2026
3 measurements spanning 4 days, net -4. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 2,168–2,176 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
10 Aug 2026, 17:282,169-6
7 Aug 2026, 09:402,175+2
6 Aug 2026, 23:472,173first reading

Engagement

26 posts held, back to 2 July 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 2 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
24.7%
avg views ÷ 2,169 subscribers
Avg views / post
537
14 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.995%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
14
of 26 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate. It is computed over the 10 of 14 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026
Posts held26 (2 July 20267 August 2026)
Views total7,515
Reactions total66
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken7 Aug 2026, 16:53 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

Reaction mix

104 reactions across 19 posts, in 5 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 58.7% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
👍6158.7%
3331.7%
👏65.77%
👎21.92%
🤬21.92%

No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.

Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.

Coverage. Reactions were read on 19 of the 26 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 104reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 26 most recent posts we hold, published 2 July 2026 to 7 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Recent posts

7 Aug 2026, 14:01 UTC59 views2 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

🔴 CUBA: UN BLANCO QUE SE MUEVE Recientemente, POLITICO publicó reportajes sobre un supuesto aumento de la actividad de inteligencia estadounidense en Cuba. Pero hay otra lectura posible: ¿y si estos reportajes reflejan la frustración de Washington ante la incapacidad de doblegar a un país que ha demostrado su capacidad de resistencia? El mensaje es claro: Cuba está alerta, tiene servicios de inteligencia probados y

👍2

7 Aug 2026, 13:58 UTC58 views1 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

¡Basta de farsa! 🚫 Ante las acusaciones sin pruebas de personajes como Marco Rubio, Cuba responde con expedientes judiciales y hechos concretos. 📄💪 desglosa cómo los servicios de seguridad cubanos han frenado aviones terroristas financiados desde EE.UU. que pretendían atacar hospitales, escuelas y nuestra red eléctrica. 🔹 El desmantelamiento de la red de mercados digitales de la USAID y la NED. 🔹 El fracaso de l

👍1

7 Aug 2026, 13:57 UTC57 views1 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

🔥 MARCO RUBIO: EL ROSTRO DE LA AGRESIÓN CONTRA CUBA Y SUS OSCUROS VÍNCULOS Detrás del discurso del "luchador por la libertad" que repiten desde Miami, se esconde una de las figuras más controversiales y oportunistas de la política estadounidense. 🔍 Lo que Rubio no cuenta de su pasado: 💊 Doble rasero con el narcotráfico: 💰 Corrupción y tráfico de influencias: 🇨🇺 Su guerra contra Cuba: 📢 Los cubanos de la Isla lo

👍1

7 Aug 2026, 13:55 UTC52 views2 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Santiago Álvarez: el terrorista que ordenó volar el Tropicana y camina libre por Miami Había una conversación grabada. La orden era clara: "—¿Tú quieres que yo haga algo allí? —Si quieres hacer eso, mejor, a mí me da lo mismo, ahí tienes la ventaja de que con un par de laticas se acaba aquello." Quien hablaba era Santiago Álvarez Fernández-Magriñá, un terrorista cubanoamericano con un historial que asusta: ¿Quién

1👍1

7 Aug 2026, 13:53 UTC53 viewsread 7 August 2026
Photo

🤝 ¿Para qué sirvió tanta solidaridad? Una pregunta que merece respuesta. A veces el cansancio nos hace preguntar lo más difícil. En medio del cerco energético, las deportaciones y la asfixia económica, muchos cubanos se angustian y piensan: "Dimos tanto al mundo, ¿y hoy...?" Esa pregunta es legítima, humana, y en Razones de Cuba hemos decidido enfrentarla de frente, sin consignas vacías ni evasivas. 📖 Lea el edito

7 Aug 2026, 13:51 UTC60 viewsread 7 August 2026
Photo

El poder de la repetición vs. La realidad de la opinión pública: El caso Cuba. El reciente informe del Observatorio de Medios de Cubadebate ofrece una lección de análisis de datos aplicado a la comunicación política. Mientras el Secretario de Estado Marco Rubio insiste en calificar a Cuba como una "amenaza para la seguridad nacional", el estudio demuestra que la maquinaria de amplificación gubernamental logra impon

4 Aug 2026, 15:55 UTC396 viewsread 7 August 2026
Photo

📄 Balance del ciclo de desinformación sobre el informe de Cuba El informe de 100 páginas del Departamento de Estado de EE.UU. estuvo 11 días en portada sin aportar pruebas nuevas. Recicló material de la Guerra Fría y funcionó más como herramienta de disputa política interna en Washington que como diagnóstico real sobre Cuba. Mientras tanto, la cooperación médica cubana es verificable: 24.000 profesionales en 56 paí

3 Aug 2026, 09:32 UTC370 viewsread 7 August 2026
Photo

📰 Tres frentes abiertos: el informe de Washington sin pruebas, el apagón que no cesa y el cerco a las brigadas médicas cubanas Once días después del informe de cien páginas, Washington no presenta pruebas. El apagón deja a cinco provincias sin luz. Sanciones contra el ministro de Salud y las brigadas médicas en 56 países. 🔗 https://razonesdecuba.cu/amanecer-cubano-2026-08-03/

3 Aug 2026, 09:12 UTC326 views2 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

📢 ALERTA: Marco Rubio miente sin pruebas 🔹 Rubio acusa a Cuba de "infiltración" y "espionaje" en EE.UU. 🔹 ¿Pruebas? CERO. No hay causas judiciales ni agentes identificados. 🔹 Mientras tanto, Cuba ha presentado ante la ONU una lista de 62 terroristas y 20 organizaciones radicadas en EE.UU. con expedientes judiciales. 🔹 Entre ellos: Santiago Álvarez, Ramón Saúl Sánchez, José Basulto, Félix Rodríguez, Alexander Otaola.

👏2

2 Aug 2026, 18:23 UTC360 views4 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

📢 ALERTA: EE.UU. fabrica amenaza contra Cuba 🔹 El Departamento de Estado, con Marco Rubio a la cabeza, publicó un informe de 100 páginas titulado "Cuba: la capital del comunismo del siglo XXI". 🔹 Acusa a Cuba de ser una "superpotencia del espionaje" que ha "infiltrado espías en el sistema estadounidense sin pagarles". 🔹 CERO PRUEBAS: No hay causas judiciales, ni agentes identificados, ni interceptaciones. Solo una n

👍4

31 Jul 2026, 15:36 UTC426 views6 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

🚨 Micrositio actualizado con lo aprobado en la ANPP 🚨 Nuevo Código de Trabajo ✅ Ley de Vivienda ✅ Ley de Tierras ✅ Ley de Identidad ✅ Nuevo Ministerio de Medio Ambiente ✅ 120 de 176 medidas listas para aplicar ✅ 🔍 Entra y explora toda la información actualizada: 👉 https://razonesdecuba.cu/transformaciones-economicas-cuba/ #Cuba #ANPP #TransformacionesEconómicas #RazonesDeCuba #176Medidas

👍6

25 Jul 2026, 04:00 UTC718 views12 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

"Esa manera callada de guapear, de buscar alternativas, de buscar soluciones, de no rendirse". Así define Yamilé Ramos Cordero, Primera Secretaria del Partido en Pinar del Río, la resistencia de su pueblo. En esta entrevista exclusiva con Razones de Cuba, la dirigente asume con compromiso y autocrítica el reconocimiento del Buró Político. Habla de las heridas aún abiertas del huracán Ian, del peso del sector no esta

👍83🤬1

Showing the 12 most recent of 26 posts we hold for @RazonesdeCuba. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 259,716 of 1,151,006entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.

Forward network

Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.

Mentions

Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.

Named by

Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.

A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.

Cite this entry

A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 10 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“Razones de Cuba” (@RazonesdeCuba), 2,169 subscribers as measured 10 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/RazonesdeCuba.

Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.