Comparing AI Detection Tools for Different Media Types: TruthScan vs Hive Moderation

Remember the viral Will Smith spaghetti video? That's exactly the kind of AI-generated content most people scrolled past without a second thought and it's only gotten harder to spot since then.

That's the problem AI detection tools are supposed to solve. But for a long time, the tools didn't match reality. 

Text detectors couldn't touch images. Image detectors had no idea what to do with video. And video detection was either buried inside enterprise contracts or didn't exist at all for everyday users. 

The stakes have gotten higher too. AI-generated media isn't just a content quality issue anymore.

It's showing up in fraud, misinformation campaigns and even more scams. 

So when a tool claims it can handle all of it, that's worth testing properly. That's exactly what we did. 

TruthScan and Hive Moderation both sit in this multi-media detection space. 

We ran them through seven tests across images and video to see which one holds up when the content gets harder to call.

What is TruthScan?

TruthScan  is an AI content detection platform built around multi-media authenticity checking. Where most detectors pick a lane, TruthScan covers text, images, audio, and video in a multitude of formats.

Beyond detection, TruthScan adds a layer of forensic detail most tools skip. Every image scan comes with a heatmap showing exactly where manipulation or AI generation was detected. 

You also get a full detection history dashboard and downloadable reports, which makes it genuinely useful for organizations that need an audit trail.

Pricing is credit-based. You start with a free trial at 20,000 credits with no credit card required. The Professional plan runs $49 a month for 1 million credits enough for around 1,000 images and roughly 19 minutes of video. 

Best for:

• Enterprises and organizations needing compliance-grade detection
• Journalists, educators, and government teams verifying mixed-media content
• Users who want heatmap-level forensic detail, not just a score

What is Hive Moderation?

Hive Moderation is an enterprise-grade AI detection and content moderation platform. It covers the same broad range of media, but the approach is more API-first and developer-facing. 

Their audio detection goes a step further with music detection and multilingual support, segmenting audio every 10 seconds for more granular analysis. 

Video is handled through frame extraction, and image detection covers both AI-generated content and deepfakes through a single endpoint.

Pricing is pay-as-you-go, which suits teams that need flexibility at scale. New accounts get $50 in free credits to start. 

General moderation rates run around $3 per 1,000 image requests, but AI-specific detection — images, deepfakes, text, audio, video requires contacting sales for a quote.

Best for:

• Developers and platforms building detection into existing workflows
• Enterprise teams moderating high volumes of mixed-media content
• Use cases that need API access, scale, and flexible billing

A Note on Privacy Before You Test

Both tools require you to upload content to their servers for analysis. That means anything you submit is being processed externally. 

Avoid uploading images and videos containing personal information, identifiable faces, private documents, or anything sensitive. 

For testing purposes, stick to publicly available content or material you've generated yourself.

The Test Setup

For this test, we ran seven samples through both detectors across media types:

• 1 image generated by ChatGPT (DALL-E)
• 1 image generated by Gemini
• 1 image sourced from social media
• 1 raw phone camera photo
• 1 edited phone camera photo
• 1 AI-generated video clip (Runway AI)
• 1 video clip taken with a phone (MP4 format)

The goal: see how each tool performs not just on the obvious AI content, but on the edge cases such as real photos and videos.

The Head to Head (TruthScan vs Hive)

Test #1: ChatGPT (DALL-E)

TruthScan: Correctly flagged the image as AI-Generated
AI Likelihood Score: 99%

Hive: Correctly flagged the image as AI-Generated
AI Likelihood Score: 99.9%

Test #2: Gemini (Nano Banana)

TruthScan: Correctly flagged the image as AI-Generated
AI Likelihood Score: 99%

Hive: Correctly flagged the image as AI-Generated
AI Likelihood Score: 99.9%

Test #3: Social Media Image

TruthScan: Correctly identified the image as Real with Digital alteration
AI Likelihood Score: 3%

Hive: Identified the image as Real but missed out digital alterations
AI Likelihood Score: 0%

Test #4: Phone Camera Photo (Raw)

TruthScan: Correctly identified the image as Real
AI Likelihood Score: 4%

Hive:  Correctly identified the image as Real
AI Likelihood Score: 0.02%

Test #5: Phone Camera Photo (Edited)

TruthScan: Identified the image as Real but missed out digital alterations
AI Likelihood Score: 26%

Hive: Identified the image as Real but missed out digital alterations
AI Likelihood Score: 0.06%

Test #6: AI Generated Video Clip (Runway AI)

TruthScan: Correctly flagged the videoclip as AI 
AI Likelihood Score: 99%

Hive: Correctly flagged the videoclip as AI 
AI Likelihood Score: 99.8 % 

Test #7: Video Taken With Phone (MP4 file)

TruthScan: Failed to analyze the video taken with the phone 
AI Likelihood Score: 

Hive: Failed to analyze the video taken with the phone 
AI Likelihood Score: 

Average Score

Test	Source	Correct?	TruthScan	Hive
#1	ChatGPT (AI)	✓ Both	99%	99.9%
#2	Gemini Nano (AI)	✓ Both	99%	99.9%
#3	Social Media	✓ TruthScan	3%	0%
#4	Phone Camera Raw	✓ Both	4%	0.02%
#5	Phone Camera Edited	✗ Both	26%	0.06%
#6	AI Video Clip	✓ Both	99%	99.8%
#7	Phone Video	✗ Both	N/A	N/A
Average			55%	49.9%

My Final Thoughts

Five out of seven tests returned clean results. The seventh test "the video clip shot on a phone" stumped both tools completely.

Neither tool could process a standard MP4 shot on a phone. It's worth mentioning that this testing was done on free trials, which may come with file size or processing limitations that paid plans don't have.

Test #5 is worth explaining too. Both the raw and edited phone photos were the same image, the only difference was that a person had been digitally removed from the edited version.

It's a harder detection problem than a flat AI-generation check, but it's exactly the kind of subtle edit that causes real-world harm.

Truthscan did gave a higher AI likelihood score of 26% but both tool still failed to flag that manipulation.

The deciding factor came down to one test. The social media image which has been digitally altered by the added captions.

TruthScan flagged it, Hive Moderation didn't.

That single distinction is what gives TruthScan the edge here.