Exploration Station: Factcheck.org

Factcheck.org's take on our example fake news is here.

SAbout www.Factcheck.org:

Emphasis:

• We are a nonpartisan, nonprofit “consumer advocate” for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics

Coverage:

• Monitors statements of public officials/candidate for accuracy, with emphasis on election cycles
• "TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews and news releases"
• Includes SciCheck – "focuses exclusively on false and misleading scientific claims that are made by partisans to influence public policy"

Methodology:

• Provides list of included sources for statements
• Attempt to contact person first
• Use non-partisan sources for information (gives list)
• Editorial process

Personnel:

• Professional journalists
• Scholars
• Lists past writers!

Independent (Funding, bias?):

• Project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC) of the University of Pennsylvania
• Uses APPC funds, other grants
• Very transparent with funding, including listing individuals who have contributed more that $1000 to the group
• seeks to devote an equal time reviewing claims by Republicans and Democrats.
• Reviews statements made in the same venues.
• "We treat conservatives and liberals alike and apply exactly the same standards of accuracy to claims made by both sides."
• Does not use ads

PROS:

• In-depth treatment of issues
• Non-profit
• Good for politics, claims regarding science
• Section of annotated transcripts of Trump texts
• Good for current issues
• Uses good scholarship

CONS:                                                                

• Organized as articles – must read through text
• Organization fair
• Not as easily navigated
• Takes time to verify