Fact Checking and Embedded Links

Fact Checking
: Correcting 'Falsehoods' and Lies, Disinformation & Misinformation
Tips of the News Trade via Poynter, St. Petersburg, Florida
: PolitiFact Project Goes International
:* https://www.poynter.org/media-news/fact-checking/
::* https://www.poynter.org/mission-vision/
:::* https://www.greenpolicy360.net/w/Fact_Checking
○
Disinformation - Online - Dangerous
Tracking the 'Big Picture' and Reporting Disinformation & Misinformation Online
:NewsGuard targets Disinformation / Misinformation: Check out the NewsGuard online services
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NewsGuard
* https://www.newsguardtech.com/
* https://www.newsguardtech.com/solutions/newsguard/
* https://www.newsguardtech.com/solutions/misinformation-fingerprints/
○
2021
The Professional World of Journalism Steps Up to Confront 'Bad Actors' 
Bots, Conspiracy Theories, Dis/Mis Information, 'Troll Farms', Political Manipulation
As embedded fact-checking grows, reporters need to show their sources 
Increased transparency will allay the suspicions of a skeptical public.
By: Joel Luther and Bill Adair	| Poynter.org
* https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2021/as-embedded-fact-checking-grows-reporters-need-to-show-their-sources/
Five years ago, the trend began as a trickle.
A few reporters started adding a bit of extra information to their stories, declaring when a politician said something false. At the time, this was a bold move. Political stories were traditionally for news and the he-said/she-said of politics and policy; fact-checking was considered a separate genre. The Duke Reporters’ Lab, dubbed it “embedded fact-checking”. This fact checking continued to grow and by 2019, there were dozens of examples... this was progress, although nearly all were about Donald Trump.
Last year, the practice grew even more. As Trump and his supporters repeated false claims about the election, reporters at The Associated Press, the New York Times, the Washington Post and many other outlets used thousands of embedded fact checks in their news articles.
We are encouraged by this progress but concerned that journalists often do not reveal the source of their conclusions. As the trend grows, they need to be more transparent to show why they concluded a statement is false.
To track this new phenomenon, we counted the use of words and phrases such as “baseless,” “falsely claimed” and “incorrectly said,” which are typically used when reporters embed a fact check, in stories in The Associated Press, The New York Times and in transcripts from CNN. Beginning in the late 1970s, these phrases appeared fewer than 100 times every month.
Usage began to tick up in 2017, coinciding with the start of the Trump presidency. “Mr. Trump falsely claimed on Twitter that ‘millions of people’ had voted illegally,” wrote The New York Times. “Trump claimed falsely that the crowd for his swearing-in stretched down the National Mall to the Washington Monument and totaled more than 1 million people,” said The Washington Post.
The big surge came last year. The word “baseless” appeared 646 times in The Associated Press, 925 times in The New York Times and a whopping 1,004 times in transcripts from CNN.
We found the same spike last year with the phrase “falsely claimed.” It appeared 120 times in CNN transcripts, 124 times in The Associated Press, and 265 times in The New York Times.
The sharpest increase came after the Nov. 3rd U.S. election.
“Major Networks Cut Away From Trump’s Baseless Fraud Claims,” read a Nov. 5 New York Times article. “Trump and allies spread falsehoods to cast doubt on election,” wrote The Associated Press on Nov. 4. Again and again, false claims were debunked right in the news stories — not by trained fact-checkers, but by political reporters willing to call out a falsehood.
The reporters usually did not show their sources, however. When we examined a sample of those stories, we found that few provided evidence why the claims were false or baseless. Reporters were surely on solid ground — a host of fact-checkers, other journalists and courts had debunked claims about election fraud and other voting problems by Trump and his supporters. But the articles didn’t provide links or attribution.
That lack of sourcing is troubling. If reporters are going to make a bold claim that a politician’s claim is baseless, they need to show why with authoritative reporting the same way that fact-checkers do.
So while we are encouraged by the growth in embedded fact-checking, we don’t want it to allow shortcuts or sloppiness. We have a few suggestions:
- It’s not enough to just label something “baseless” or “false.” You’ve got to explain why, which can often be accomplished with one additional sentence. So after you say a party leader made a false claim about nonresidents voting illegally in a state, add a sentence that says, “Fact-checkers examined that claim and found no data to support it.”
 
- Transparency is key. Link to fact checks or other authoritative, independent sources to show reassure readers it is not the writer’s opinion.
 
As we wrote in 2019, embedded fact checks shouldn’t just be about Trump, even though he is likely to continue his falsehoods as an ex-president. While his penchant for misinformation helped launch the practice into the mainstream, journalists need to expand this trend and hold other politicians accountable, too.
Embedded fact-checking is a powerful new way to get more accurate information to more readers and viewers. But it needs to be done right to reassure a skeptical audience that it’s based on facts.
______________________________________________
Joel Luther is an associate in research at the Duke Reporters’ Lab and manager of the ClaimReview Project.
Bill Adair is the Knight Professor for the Practice of Journalism and Public Policy at Duke University and the founder of PolitiFact. The fact-checking site is owned by the Tampa Bay Times, which is owned by Poynter.
St. Petersburg, Florida
○
Category:Additional Website Resources - Linked Data - Green Best Practices
Category:Citizen Science
Category:Climate Change
Category:Climate Policy
Category:Digital Citizen
Category:Digital Rights
Category:Earth
Category:Eco-nomics
Category:EOS eco Operating System
Category:Earth360
Category:EarthPOV
Category:Earth Observations
Category:Earth Science
Category:Earth Science from Space
Category:Earth System Science
Category:Ecology Studies
Category:Energy
Category:Environmental Full-cost Accounting
Category:Environmental Laws
Category:Environmental Protection
Category:Environmental Security
Category:Environmental Security, National Security
Category:ESA
Category:Externalities
Category:Florida
Category:Global Security
Category:Global Warming
Category:Green Best Practices
Category:GreenPolicy360
Category:Green Networking
Category:Green Politics
Category:Health
Category:Maps
Category:Media
Category:Money in Politics
Category:NASA
Category:Networking
Category:New Definitions of National Security
Category:NOAA
Category:Planet Citizen
Category:Planet Scientist
Category:Planet Citizens
Category:Planet Citizens, Planet Scientists
Category:Resilience
Category:Strategic Demands
Category:Sustainability
Category:Sustainability Policies
Category:ThinBlueLayer
Category:Threat Multiplier
Category:World Wide Web