211 Check is a flagship project of DEFY HATE NOW (DHN) an NNGO fully registered with the Relief and Rehabilitation Commission (RRC), the body charged with registration of nonprofits in South Sudan. Our "About Us" on the 211 Check website clearly states that "211CHECK is managed and run by DEFYHATENOW South Sudan, an NGO registered in South Sudan with a registration number 2285." We have also updated the information which will be reflected on the website soon. Find the updated version here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PR99ujmghkfdPlD7xNcKhSah58SKpk-X4nXqjFwRIRo/edit?usp=sharing

UPDATE 7/10/2022 - In response to communication regarding the concerns raised (see below) the necessary update regarding registration status is now included on the 211 Check website.

211 Check is an initiative established by the community based organization -  Defy Hate Now. Registration number 2285. (https://211check.org/about-us/). The name of the registration authority - National Relief and Rehabilitation Commission (RRC) an agency of the government of South Sudan - is missing from the 211 Check website but indicated in the application. A copy of the registration certificate is attached to the application. Registration details are not on the parent CBO website.

211 Check is South Sudan’s first and only independent fact-checking and information verification flagship project established in 2020 to counter COVID-19 dis/misinformation, but since then, the initiative has continued to grow in its scope of work. The editorial structure of 211 Check constitutes seven professional staff at the different levels of Chief Editor who is the team leader, Managing Editor, Associate Editor, Fact-checker, Data Analyst, Media Monitor and Graphics Designer. The activities we do include media monitoring, fact-checking, information verification and media information literacy through training and webinars. Our goals this year are: applying to become a signatory at the IFCN, strengthening our team capacity and reaching more content creators with our media literacy program. Read more here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PR99ujmghkfdPlD7xNcKhSah58SKpk-X4nXqjFwRIRo/edit?usp=sharing and https://211check.org/team/

UPDATE 7/10/2022 - In response to feedback on need to align explanation as to why 211 Check was formed (see below) the necessary update has been made.

Need to align information on the website and the application to answer why the organization was formed. Application says it was established to respond to COVID-19 misinformation but website indicates - 211 Check was established as one of a series of initiatives implemented by #defyhatenow in regions affected by conflict - including refugee settlements - with the goal of raising awareness on the impact of hate speech online and offline. 

No explicit statement on the website about the establishment date although the application indicates established in 2020. 

Seven (7) team members  - Photos and bios of 1 female, 5 male on website. Roles are explained clearly on the website (https://211check.org/211-check-editorial-structure/) with exception of the graphics designer (missing from website).

Activities are not clearly indicated on the website but those indicated in the application do correlate closely with objectives published on the site including 1) publishing fact-checked articles/reports in South Sudan. 2) editorial support for training and capacity development for fact-checking by South Sudanese journalists, bloggers, and content creators.

Goals for the next year are clearly set out in the application - not published on the website.

At the time of rendering our application for the first time, we have had at least a fact-check a week on average. However, from late May this year, our website has run into technical glitches that are being solved. Read our fact-checks here: https://211check.org/fact-checks/ and here: https://211check.org/data-stories/ Our website should be fully up by the end of this month and we commit to write articles as expected of us.

UPDATE 7/10/2022 - I have been provided with adequate access to assess fact-checks and I am satisfied that the applicant is compliant and actively addressing the concerns raised previously; updates are being posted to the website and the process is on-going . 

I am unable to access fact-checks dating before February 2022 as the page links at the bottom of the website page do not seem to work. Additionally fact-checking appears to have slowed to two articles published in May 2022 and then stopped.

Fact-checked data stories on the site date back to November 30, 2021, Publication of these on the website has also stopped after May 2022. 

Please, refer to the following links on our website to review fact-checks published over the previous three months:

Fact-checks we publish can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/fact-checks/

Our data stories can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/data-stories/

Many of the fact-checks posted to the website address scams. The use of altered images and images used out of context is also prevalent. At least 75% of the fact-checks published over the three months prior to the application address issues that could impact the wellbeing of individuals, the general public and society. The applicant is compliant in this regard.

211 Check is a non-partisan organization. It is unaffiliated with any political party and does not accept funding from them.

#defyhatenow South Sudan accepts private-sector and non-profit funding for its 211 Check project. Our website includes a list of our donors.

While certain projects and initiatives may be guided in part by the specific requirements of our funding partners, our donors are aware that 211 Check maintains operational and editorial independence. Our decisions are guided by the mission and values of our parent organization, #defyhatenow.

The applicant is in compliance in this regard. There is a clear statement of editorial independence and the non-partisan nature of 211 Check contained in the Editorial Policy posted on the website.

There is no obvious evidence of any links to the state or any political entity in South Sudan.

Other funders are regional and international non-governmental organizations and the UNDP.

We don't receive funding from a local or foreign states or political actors. We have worked with a few donors and partners including UNDP in South Sudan, Internews South Sudan, the European Union Delegation to South Sudan, Facebook, Article 19, Meedan, Code for Africa and Africa Check, mostly on short term projects and capacity building collaborations. A list of our donors and partners can be found at the footer of our website homepage: https://211check.org/#top

The Statement of Independence includes the following: "While certain projects and initiatives may be guided in part by the specific requirements of our funding partners, our donors are aware that #defyhatenow South Sudan maintains operational and editorial independence for its 211 Check project. Our decisions are guided by the mission and values of our parent organization, #defyhatenow South Sudan."

See link >>>> https://211check.org/statement-of-independence/

We are guided by our editorial policy and methodology in doing our fact-checking work. This ensures that we maintain consistency in setting out evidence and selecting claims to fact-check. In our fact-checks, you will notice that first, we have an introduction that states the claim when and where it was found and why it has been selected for fact-checking. We then proceed to undertake an investigation highlighting our research and findings. Then, we conclude with a verdict. 

1. https://211check.org/fact-check-mtn-south-sudan-40th-anniversary-celebration-gift-raffle-is-a-hoax/ 

2. https://211check.org/fact-check-is-mwijukye-robert-lubang-part-of-a-group-that-initiated-a-conflict-in-magwi/ 

3. https://211check.org/fact-check-achai-wiir-not-giving-all-south-sudanese-artists-2000-each-this-year/ 

4. https://211check.org/fact-check-this-plane-with-the-south-sudan-flag-and-luggage-on-top-is-digitally-altered/ 

5. https://211check.org/fact-check-this-image-does-not-show-vehicles-submerged-in-floodwater-following-todays-rain-in-juba/ 

6. https://211check.org/fact-check-civil-service-commission-not-recruiting-the-job-advertisement-is-a-hoax/ 

7. https://211check.org/fact-check-ministry-of-petroleum-undersecretarys-resignation-letter-is-fake/ 

8. https://211check.org/fact-check-this-photo-was-not-taken-in-a-public-hospital-in-south-sudan/ 

9. https://211check.org/fact-check-business-grant-scam-in-south-sudan-resurfaces-on-facebook/ 

10. https://211check.org/fact-check-was-this-a-thief-on-a-street-light-in-juba-no/ 

211 Check is in compliance on this. There is an opportunity for growth here in paying greater attention to detail. On the whole, these reports are framed in line with IFCN protocols and standards although there are a few mistakes  especially when it comes to letting the evidence point to the conclusion such as dead/ non-existent links >>>>>  https://211check.org/fact-check-these-photos-do-not-show-ammunition-confiscated-by-the-national-security-yesterday/

A few, like the following, are missing comparative data such as the WHOIS data for https://www.boss.gov.ss/ in the following:>>>>   https://211check.org/hoax- the-bank-of-south-sudan-is-not-giving-100000-pounds-to-lucky-winners-for-its-10th-anniversary/

Others do not link to the source of the debunk where available.

We choose claims to be fact-checked or verified based on the following public interest worthiness matrix of the claim or content:

Virality: the tendency of an image, video, or piece of information to be circulated rapidly and widely from one Internet user to another; the quality or fact of being viral.

Harmfulness (Likelihood to cause harm): Does the piece of information have content that will likely cause immediate physical or emotional harm to an individual or a group? Does the content contain information that incites violence against a community or an individual?

Believability: Given that the content is false, how likely is it for the general public and social media users to believe it. (i.e skilled photoshopped picture vs an image with just a caption on it. Piece of info that has some facts mixed with false information making it harder to distinguish).

Factualness: How factual is the piece of information? Is it based on a well-established source and reported the body of knowledge or it is based on opinions and inaccurate claims?

Fact-checkable or not? Can the content or report be fact-checked or verified using publicly available evidence or data?

Because we were first trained by Africa Check on fact-checking and information verification, we somehow follow how they select claims as stated here: https://211check.org/how-to-fact-check/

https://211check.org/our-methodology/

Also refer to this document for more information: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DYUIlBUiTb6_XkhzK-EHf6XJ8q9WSalE/edit#

Compliant. Information on how a claim is selected is indicated in the Content/Claim Public interest worthiness matrix at the end of the page laying out the methodology.

https://211check.org/our-methodology/ 

Please, refer to the following links on our website to review fact-checks published over the previous one year:

Fact-checks we publish can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/fact-checks/

Our data stories can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/data-stories/

Compliant. Most of the fact checks on the 211 Check website are straightforward debunks of hoaxes, manipulated content or content used out of content. 

The only fact-checks that required clarification of the interest of the source were two -  "Fact-check: Is Mwijukye Robert Lubang part of a group that initiated a conflict in Magwi?" and "Fact-check: Achai Wiir not giving all South Sudanese artists $ 2000 each this year". This was clearly done and in both fact-checks brothers of the subject of the fact check were contacted for comment and are clearly identified as such.

Please, refer to the following links on our website to review fact-checks published over the previous one year:

Fact-checks we publish can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/fact-checks/

Our data stories can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/data-stories/

Compliant. There is  no indication that 211 Check serves or is affiliated with any political party or politician or political candidate nor does it advocate for a position other than its own stated interests. Likewise, judging from the information available, the parent organization #DefyHateNow also has no political affiliation.

211 Check does not advocate (for) or take policy positions on the issues we fact-check. Our decisions are guided by the mission and values of our parent organization, #defyhatenow. 

Our statement on non-partisanship can be found in our editorial policy here: https://211check.org/211-check-editorial-policy/

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BbMPAEqRB6tXISFLFT6nvsc4EMjM8GV2POx7OoRCDV0/edit

Compliant. Statement of Independence sets out the policy "211 Check fully understands the importance of maintaining independence and impartiality in doing its work. Its top management, fact-checkers and media monitors are committed to ensuring: the independence and impartiality of its fact-checking and information verification work, the adherence to editorial procedures for maintaining independence and objectivity, and the pro-active management of any threat of actual or perceived conflicts of interest affecting our editorial work."

See link >>>> https://211check.org/statement-of-independence/

Editorial policy further states "211 Check does not advocate (for) or take policy positions on the issues we fact-check."

211 Check is dedicated to providing its readers with the most complete disclosure of the information's sources. In order for readers to understand how and where we obtained our information, we strive to be as clear as possible in our work. Transparency is a reflection of our principles of honesty and fairness. We, in most cases provide hyperlinks to all online sources of information. Our policy on sources can be found here:  https://docs.google.com/document/d/12-GS5ASzbU_ihN3oe0Rc5BAQoghL4WMZgABs72fALT0/edit?usp=sharing

Compliant. 211 is urged to quality check all fact checks for consistency in the integrity of links to the source of the misinformation and any other links used  so as to avoid omission such as in the following:

1. https://211check.org/fact-check-mtn-south-sudan-40th-anniversary-celebration-gift-raffle-is-a-hoax/

2. https://211check.org/fact-check-is-mwijukye-robert-lubang-part-of-a-group-that-initiated-a-conflict-in-magwi/

3. https://211check.org/fact-check-civil-service-commission-not-recruiting-the-job-advertisement-is-a-hoax/

Other quality assurance checks could include:-

• Links to primary sources.
• Screenshots of responses received by Whatsapp or SMS where the primary source is contacted and responds directly.
• Links to readily available sources, such as WHOIS information, that is referred to in the report.
• Some links to sources, such as Google Reverse Image Search should resolve. E.g. here https://211check.org/fact-check-this-plane-with-the-south-sudan-flag-and-luggage-on-top-is-digitally-altered/

Please, refer to the following links on our website to review fact-checks published over the previous year:

Fact-checks we publish can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/fact-checks/

Our data stories can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/data-stories/

The applicant uses appropriate primary sources in fact checks.

Please, refer to the following links on our website to review fact-checks published over the previous year:

Fact-checks we publish can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/fact-checks/

Our data stories can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/data-stories/

Compliant. The applicant could strengthen the authority of its fact checks by expanding the minimum number of sources used in each fact check to 2-3. In the same regard, it would also help to explain why obvious potential sources were not used such as in the following report where the under-secretary mentioned in the title is not contacted:

https://211check.org/fact-check-ministry-of-petroleum-undersecretarys-resignation-letter-is-fake/   

and this

https://211check.org/fact-check-has-the-splm-io-been-dissolved-as-claimed-no/                                                                                                      

Please, refer to the following links on our website to review fact-checks published over the previous year:

Fact-checks we publish can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/fact-checks/

Our data stories can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/data-stories/

Compliant. The familial, political and institutional positions of all primary sources are clearly indicated in fact checks and these help the reader to understand the interests of the source used to debunk information - for example:

https://211check.org/fact-check-has-the-splm-io-been-dissolved-as-claimed-no/

211 Check is a flagship project of #defyhatenow South Sudan, a national non-governmental organisation duly registered by the South Sudan Relief and Rehabilitation Commission (SSRRC). It is run and managed by its parent organisation and therefore not independent.

We state clearly in the about section of our website that 211 Check is run and managed by #defyhatenow South Sudan: https://211check.org/about-us/

#defyhatenow South Sudan also states on its homepage that it owns 211 Check: https://defyhatenow.org/defyhatenow_southsudan/

The details of 211 Check's independence and legal registration are on the "About us" page. https://211check.org/about-us/

Here is the link on the #defyhatenow website indicating ownership of 211 Check: https://defyhatenow.org/defyhatenow_southsudan/

On a similar note, 211 Check states in the about section of its website that it is run and managed by #defyhatenow South Sudan: https://211check.org/about-us/

#defyhatenow South Sudan mainly secures funding through grant opportunities, most of which are short term lasting less than a year. A list of our donors and partners can be found at the footer of our website homepage as in the above links. We do not have a single and consistent funding source at the moment

A clear statement of the relationship between 211 Check and the parent organization DefyHateNow is indicated along with details of legal registration on the "About us" page. https://211check.org/about-us/

The 211 Check Editorial Structure  constitutes a variety of professional staff at different levels, as discussed here: https://211check.org/211-check-editorial-structure/

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EJ4pZrNhutF_zWCNJAcoW1xZPzqdRzu-/edit

The editorial organogram is clearly laid out on the website  and a list of roles and responsibilities follows below it indicating how the team works. Ultimate supervision and responsibility for 211 Check desk rests with the Team Leader / Chief Editor.

https://211check.org/211-check-editorial-structure/

211 Check has a list of its team members here: https://211check.org/team/

This does not fully reflect the editorial structure, because there has been a downsizing due to funding shortage making some of the current team members to do cross cutting roles across data analysis, media monitoring, basic graphics design and fact-checking.

Links to the professional biographies of the editorial team are clearly laid out here:

https://211check.org/team/

On our website, we have a link through which website visitors can contact us with the following caption: "Got a claim for us to fact-check? Is there a claim that you would like us to investigate? Has a politician, a business or union leader, a health association or environmental group said something that you suspect is untrue or misleading and that should be challenged?" Users can click on this link: https://211check.org/contact/ to reach us.

We also have a WhatsApp button on our website homepage through which we can be contacted.

The home page of the 211 Check site has a call to submit information for fact checking (Got a claim for us to fact-check?) and a link to the contact page.

https://211check.org/contact/

There is a floating Whatsapp button on the site allows for direct messaging.

The methodology we use is based on the following content reporting and feedback process:

1. Content identification: Content and/or claim is identified by a 211 Check media monitor fellow or community member.

2. Content categorization and labelling: Content and/or claim is submitted through the content submission form: https://forms.gle/Ny8fikJRQFcE1CZQ7

3. Action by 211 Check: 211 Check content moderator evaluates the content and takes a prescribed action based on the assessment.

4. Result of Action: 211 Check content moderator and/or fact-checker receives a result from a third party or senior management on the content or claim.

5. Feedback to the content originator: 211 Check content moderator and/or fact-checker provides feedback to the content originator.

Steps 1 & 2 are evicted by 211 Check’s media monitors by filling the content form: https://forms.gle/Ny8fikJRQFcE1CZQ7 

Steps 3, 4, and 5 are done by the Content moderator and will be recorded in the content sheet, refer to columns J to P on this sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ysNk9Po5VYVPGuL0a_VGqbJ10Um_it6VPZZe7BhrFE8/edit?usp=sharing

Our methodology can be found here: https://211check.org/our-methodology/

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DYUIlBUiTb6_XkhzK-EHf6XJ8q9WSalE/edit#

UPDATE 7/10/2022 - Compliant. Content has been consolidated as recommended in previous notes (see below). 

Much of the required information is there. I would suggest sequencing the information on the page to make it follow the actual fact checking process, beginning with how a claim is selected.

Information on how a claim is selected is laid out in the Content/Claim Public interest worthiness matrix at the bottom of the page laying out the methodology. Information on how the claims are researched needs to be beefed up slightly to reflect the background research (online and offline), use of tools to identify manipulation, interviews with primary sources etc. Information on how fact checks are written is missing and should lay out the importance of linking to all available sources so the reader is able to arrive at the same conclusion themself. 

https://211check.org/our-methodology/                                                                                                            

"We choose claims to be fact-checked or verified based on the following matrix:

Virality: the tendency of an image, video, or piece of information to be circulated rapidly and widely from one Internet user to another; the quality or fact of being viral.

Harmfulness (Likelihood to cause harm): Does the piece of information have content that will likely cause immediate physical or emotional harm to an individual or a group? Does the content contain information that incites violence against a community or an individual?

Believability: Given that the content is false, how likely is it for the general public and social media users to believe it. (i.e skilled photoshopped picture vs an image with just a caption on it. Piece of info that has some facts mixed with false information making it harder to distinguish).

Factualness: How factual is the piece of information? Is it based on a well-established source and reported the body of knowledge or it is based on opinions and inaccurate claims?

Fact-checkable or not? Can the content or report be fact-checked or verified using publicly available evidence or data?"

Compliant. These explanations should be included consistently as done in the following fact checks that indicate that the claims being examined had gone viral: -

https://211check.org/fact-check-ministry-of-petroleum-undersecretarys-resignation-letter-is-fake/

https://211check.org/fact-check-viral-link-asking-students-to-apply-for-laptop-scheme-2021-22-is-a-hoax/

Please, refer to the following links on our website to review fact-checks published over the previous year:

Fact-checks we publish can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/fact-checks/

Our data stories can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/data-stories/

Compliant. The applicant indicates evidence in support of the claim as well as relevant evidence that appears to undermine it and it is recommended that this be done consistently for all fact checks. For example, this claim about an imposter Twitter account with the name of the Bank of South Sudan, highlights the fact that the Central Bank of South Sudan currently has three genuine Twitter accounts in its name and this makes it difficult for followers to figure out which is authentic and actively used. It then elaborates on why it has been found to be a fake account.

https://211check.org/fact-check-bss_original-is-the-authentic-twitter-account-for-the-bank-of-south-sudan/

Please, refer to the following links on our website to review fact-checks published over the previous year:

Fact-checks we publish can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/fact-checks/

Our data stories can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/data-stories/

Compliant. The same standards are applied to each claim. 

Please, refer to the following links on our website to review fact-checks published over the previous year:

Fact-checks we publish can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/fact-checks/

Our data stories can be found in this section of our website: https://211check.org/data-stories/

Compliant. 211 Check seeks to contact the person concerned or their designated spokesperson and should consistently apply their own best practice standards. For example, the press secretary of South Sudan's First Vice President Riek Machar responded to this claim about the dissolution of SPLM-IO party. the party Machar leads.

https://211check.org/fact-check-has-the-splm-io-been-dissolved-as-claimed-no/

In this case the spokesperson for the Bank of South Sudan was contacted

https://211check.org/fact-check-bss_original-is-the-authentic-twitter-account-for-the-bank-of-south-sudan/

"We have a call to action on our website and a form to submit claims that requires fact-checking. We do not check opinions, predictions and/or statements that cannot be verified using open source data.

This can be found at the right end of the 211 Check website homepage: https://211check.org/"

UPDATE 7/10/2022 - The concern indicated previously (see below) has been addressed with the insertion of the statement "We do not check opinions, predictions and/or statements that cannot be verified using open source data." 

There is no indication as to what readers can and cannot expect when they send in a claim to be checked and this needs to be corrected. 

There is however, a clear call to send in claims for fact checking.This is pinned to all 211 Check online assets which all promote the call to act and link to each other.

Website home page https://211check.org/# (Link to IG page not working)

Floating Whatsapp button on the website

Pinned tweet on its Twitter handle https://twitter.com/211Check

Pinned post on its Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/211check/

Also shared on its IG account 211check

As per the correction policy, 211 Check continues to strengthen its fight against misinformation by building the capacity of its team in regular fact-checking and monitoring the content flow on websites, social media and offline. 211 Check actively does fact-checking work and data analysis.

In case of any appeal or feedback, 211 Check takes note of the details provided, does the correction/corrections following our Standard Operating Procedures and editorial guidelines and also puts on record the fact-check articles that needed corrections.

Here is our corrections policy: https://211check.org/our-corrections-policy-at-211-check/

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k4CbOsCLnYz2HLuzb1WMz2z29oj9oK8xOSnIY4UqiKk/edit#

A clear corrections policy is placed on the website.

https://211check.org/our-corrections-policy-at-211-check/

"Our correction policy is a document that informs and governs staff behavior, sets clear expectations, and confirms that 211 Check performs its role in being open to corrections.

It is also the basis for staff supervision, training, and supporting a defense in case of a negative outcome. We welcome and value both positive and negative feedback from our audience which we receive in the form of comments, emails and phone calls. This is our revised corrections policy that is not yet reflected on the website: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k4CbOsCLnYz2HLuzb1WMz2z29oj9oK8xOSnIY4UqiKk/edit?usp=sharing"

UPDATE 7/10/2022 - 211 Check is now compliant with Criteria 6.2. The corrections policy is now aligned with IFCN principles. 

The corrections policy is readily available on the website. It, however, needs some amendments if it is to meet IFCN criteria. It does not outline what is and is not handled under the corrections policy nor does it address the commitment to handle all corrections openly and transparently and to ensure that as far as possible those who may have seen the original fact check will be reached by the correction.

There is also reference to removing the content which is not in line with IFCN policy: "Depending on the authenticity and magnitude of the mistake/error, 211 Check removes/edits the published information or duly informs the reader in case the original news does not qualify as a mistake and how the 211 Check Desk arrived at such a decision."

Since 211 Check is a somewhat new organisation in the fact-checking and information verification arena, first having the task of prebunking and then debunking, we always remind our staff to stick to the organisation's editorial policy. The editors also make sure that fact-check articles are properly checked to meet our standard operating procedures.

That is why since our inception, we have not made any corrections to our published work, but sure we shall in accordance with our corrections policy if the need comes up. 

Find our core values and principles of work here: https://211check.org/211-check-editorial-policy/

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BbMPAEqRB6tXISFLFT6nvsc4EMjM8GV2POx7OoRCDV0/edit#

I did not find any case where the corrections policy has been brought into force. This is likely because 211 Check is a relatively new organization and is noted by the applicant in response to this query. I have therefore indicated them as being compliant.

We are not yet a signatory of the IFCN code of principles, but once we become a signatory, we shall include a complaints page on our website where users can inform the International Fact-checking Network (IFCN) if they believe we are violating the IFCN's code.

In the meantime, users send complaints to us via e-mail or our WhatsApp tipline. We are open to corrections and honest feedback from our audience.

This is not applicable. 211 Check is not yet an IFCN signatory. If they become signatories this will then become applicable.

We are not the fact-checking unit of a media company, thus we entirely depend on our corrections policy: https://211check.org/our-corrections-policy-at-211-check/

 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k4CbOsCLnYz2HLuzb1WMz2z29oj9oK8xOSnIY4UqiKk/edit#

211 Check is the fact checking project of an NGO not a media company so this is not applicable.