Why fact checking is important

PolitiFact writers and editors spend considerable time researching and deliberating on our rulings. We always try to get the original statement in its full context rather than an edited form that appeared in news stories.

We then divide the statement into individual claims that we check separately. When possible, we go to original sources to verify the claims. We look for original government reports rather than news stories. We interview impartial experts. The above notes that in order for PolitiFact staffers to do their fact checking, they must engage in the work of verification.

This is a useful definition of verification. It also helps describe the process applied by fact checkers to do their work. You can't be a fact checker without practicing verification. But verification is practiced by many people who are not fact checkers — or journalists, for that matter.

Verification has come back to the fore of journalism, and taken on new urgency for people such as human rights workers and law enforcement, thanks to the rise of social media and user-generated content. The problem is compounded by the fact that polls have shown trust in the media to be near an all-time low. As a result, popular websites and social media accounts have been created with the expressed purpose of undermining the conclusions of fact-checking organizations.

With all these obstacles, it would be easy to ask whether fact-checking is worth it at all. The answer is a resounding yes.

Although it may not be a complete inoculation against misinformation, the existence of fact-checking organizations undoubtedly gives pause to some politicians when considering whether to convey dubious information. The ability to provide real-time fact-checks during political debates and major speeches, as well as factual refutations of social media posts and interview responses, provides a great public benefit to Americans who are willing to consider new information when deciding how to vote.

Without fact-checking websites, it would be much more difficult to find accurate and reliable information about claims made by political leaders. The explosion of pay-per-click hoax news stories on social media has made it easier than ever for a bogus claim to go viral. By explaining how verification works, they also sensitize audiences to the challenges journalists face.

Through media information and literacy programs, fact-checkers directly train others in the techniques of identifying and challenging misinformation. Teachers, librarians, and local media are natural partners who can help to educate wider audiences and thus multiply the impact of fact-checking work. Africa Check, Chequeado, and Full Fact argue that much still remains to be done. Visit the new DW website Take a look at the beta version of dw.

Go to the new dw. More info OK. Wrong language? Change it here DW. COM has chosen English as your language setting. But reality is more than this information; it includes the availability of information from a variety of sources. We weave these stories into a comprehensive meaning for ourselves.

The network effect of social media has broadened the sources of information and thus the construction of our narratives. Social media has also removed a primary filter of journalists as the establishment of truth teller.

Some politicians and opinion makers have seized upon this opportunity as an exercise of power. The political thinker, Hannah Arendt , explained how this manipulation can occur, through the interplay of facts, opinion, and power.

So, what is the relationship between facts and opinions? Opinions can be informed by facts, or by the purposeful denial of them if a group consensus compels one so. And nowadays, social media networks present a new and powerful tool to manipulate consent.