Organization: Africa Check
Applicant: Laura Kapelari
Assessor: Laurent Bigot
Conclusion and recommendations
Laurent Bigot wrote:
According to my second assessment, I think Africa Check continues to be a reliable fact-checking partner. This media is compliant with every principles enacted by the IFCN.
Laurent Bigot recommended Accept
Section 1: Organization
Criterion 1a
Proof of registration
Evidence required: Please provide evidence that the signatory is a legally-registered organization set up exclusively for the purpose of fact-checking or the distinct fact-checking project of a recognized media house or research institution.
Africa Check
14-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Africa Check was set up in 2012 as a fact-checking organisation, based in the offices of the Journalism Department of the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa, with funding from a media innovation contest organised by the International Press Institute.
Today we operate across Africa, with offices in South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya and Senegal. The Johannesburg office is our overall headquarters. The editorial team based in Johannesburg oversees the work of our South Africa, Nigeria and Kenya offices, shown on our English-language website: https://africacheck.org/. The Senegal office, also answers to the Johannesburg head office, and runs our French-language site, covering Senegal and other countries of francophone west Africa: https://fr.africacheck.org/.
Africa Check's governing body is the non-profit Africa Check Trust, based in South Africa. It is registered with the Master's Office in Cape Town South Africa, with registration number IT000728/2015(C). Seven years on from our founding, Africa Check Trust is today supported by Africa Check C.I.C., a non-profit Community Interest Company based in London, which exists to support the wider operation. A copy of the 2015 Trust Deed is attached. You can see our registration in the UK on this link. https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08119885
Laurent Bigot Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago)
Africa Check is a legally registered organization set up exclusively for the purpose of fact-checking.
All the evidence of its legal registration are presented in the “About us” or “A propos” section here: https://africacheck.org/about-us/
Africa Check is registered as a non-profit Community Interest Company (CIC) in the UK. Details of their registration can be found on this link: https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/08119885
done_all 1a marked as Fully compliant by Laurent Bigot.
Criterion 1b
Archive
Evidence required: Insert a link to the archive of fact checks published in the previous three months. If you do not collect all fact checks in one place, please explain how the fact-checking is conducted by your organization.
Africa Check
14-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Our overall output, including factchecks, blogs, podcasts, factsheets and guides to factchecking can all be seen on these two sites: https://africacheck.org/ and https://fr.africacheck.org/
In each language we produce and list three main types of fact-check (full-length fact-checks called "reports"; shorter fact-checks called "spot checks" and fact-checks we do specifically on content seen on Facebook.
They can be seen on these links in English:
1) https://africacheck.org/latest-reports/
2) https://africacheck.org/latest-reports/spot-check/
3) https://africacheck.org/fbchecks/
And in French here:
1) https://fr.africacheck.org/articles/
2) https://fr.africacheck.org/articles/sur-le-vif/
3) https://fr.africacheck.org/fbchecks/
Laurent Bigot Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Africa Check publishes reports about the accuracy of claims regularly, in French and in English. They have published several fact-checks a week for the last past three months. All their work, since 2012, is published here in English:
1) https://africacheck.org/latest-reports/
2) https://africacheck.org/latest-reports/spot-check/
3) https://africacheck.org/fbchecks/
And in French here:
1) https://fr.africacheck.org/articles/
done_all 1b marked as Fully compliant by Laurent Bigot.
Section 2: Nonpartisanship and Fairness
Criterion 2a
Body of work sample
Evidence required: Please share links to ten fact checks that better represent the scope and consistency of your fact-checking. Provide a short explanation of how your organization strives to maintain coherent standards across fact checks.
Africa Check
14-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Africa Check selects claims to check based on the reach and importance of the claim to the public, and the potential impact it might have on society if not checked. Africa Check does not advocate for any matter except the availability of quality data. We seek to fact-check all relevant sides in any debate, and apply the same methodology to all our reports. The process is as follows:
START WITH THE CLAIM: We start every fact-checking report with the claim or claims someone has made. If the claim is sourced in a news report, the editor always seeks to verify with the speaker or their office exactly what was said and the context.
CHECK THE EVIDENCE: Once the claim is established, the most important step is to find good reliable sources of evidence to check the claim against. This is evidence in the public domain that verifies or contradicts what has been said, data from a public database, the findings of academic studies, the opinion of established experts, or other sources. Our reports are typically based on primary sources – a recording, a transcript, a database or other verifiable primary source if possible. Secondary sources are used where necessary but only if properly checked and attributed.
REPORT WRITING: The report format is standardised to follow a set pattern – a headline that is easy-to- read and deliver the report’s conclusion; a body that sets out the claim we are investigating and a conclusion based on our finding. We also summarise the claim and the finding in table for easy reference.
Claims made about health and social issues form a major part of our work, due to the context of the countries we work in. Nevertheless, we do cover claims made by political figures and institutions.
See below links to relevant fact-checks from our English-language site across our three main English-language countries (Kenya, Nigeria and South Africa)
IN NIGERIA
1: In this report, we fact-checked 8 key election claims from the two main candidates of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) who are the perceived frontrunner parties in Nigeria’s 16 February 2019 election. This demonstrates balance in our focus between the two main parties.
https://africacheck.org/reports/battle-of-the-titans-fact-checking-arch-rivals-in-race-for-nigerias-presidency/
2: But - we tried not to ignore the smaller parties, and also checked claims made by other ‘lesser-known’ candidates as shown here.
https://africacheck.org/reports/nigeria-debate2019-did-presidential-candidates-get-their-facts-straight/
3: Before this, we fact-checked President Buhari’s ‘Democaracy Day’ speech - the Nigerian equivalent perhaps of the State of the Union. Of the seven claims checked, we found three to be accurate.
https://africacheck.org/reports/buharis-2018-democracy-day-speech-7-main-claims-under-scrutiny/
IN KENYA
4: Kenya’s President Uhuru Kenyatta delivered his state of the nation address in May 2018. Our ratings on the claims ranged from ‘correct’ and ‘unproven’ to ‘understated’ and ‘incorrect.
https://africacheck.org/reports/uhuru-kenyattas-2018-state-of-the-nation-address-fact-checked/
5: Kenya’s governors – who are not too fond of the centre - also have their own state of the nation address, and we fact-checked this.
https://africacheck.org/reports/hit-or-miss-5-claims-by-kenyan-governors-fact-checked/
6: We checked a claim that Kenya’s executive arm of government was taking nearly all of the country’s budget resources – 95% - and found that it was much lower, at 52%.
https://africacheck.org/reports/yes-kenyas-executive-takes-the-lions-share-of-funds-but-not-95/
7: And following general unhappiness with the raising of taxes in Kenya, we checked claims from the government about the revenue base.
IN SOUTH AFRICA
8: In South Africa, we have just started fact-checking the manifestos of the main parties. This is the first one (ANC) and we will then be checking the EFF and DA's manifestos. We are checking with readers what fourth party's manifesto to cover.
https://africacheck.org/reports/anc-2019-election-manifesto-factcheck/
9: With all our fact-checks we are guided by the evidence. On this occasion, the opposition Democratic Alliance alleged the government was spending more money on guarding VIPS than on land reform. We found this correct.
https://africacheck.org/reports/yes-south-africas-government-spends-as-much-on-vip-protection-security-as-on-land-reform/
10: But we also found a claim by a DA mayor that the country receives R300 billion in aid from the US as off by a mile.
https://africacheck.org/reports/sa-received-r6-1-billion-2017-us-not-r300-billion-da-mayor-claimed/
11: We have found the ANC to have looked to pad its job creation rate – a major political issue in the country – by ignoring population growth.
https://africacheck.org/reports/anc-job-creation-boast-ignores-sas-increased-unemployment-rate/
12: But we also found the party was also correct about the importance of Johannesburg to both the country and the continent of Africa.
https://africacheck.org/reports/does-gauteng-make-up-a-third-of-south-africas-gdp-and-is-it-africas-seventh-biggest-economy/
13: And again, we seek to avoid an over-emphasis on the major parties and have fact-checked a lesser known political party seeking parliamentary approval to make changes to South African abortion law. We found no data supported the argument advanced in support of changing the law.
https://africacheck.org/reports/do-200000-abortions-many-a-repeat-take-place-in-sa-each-year/
We take the same approach in French
1) Un diplomate dont nous avons examiné les propos, c’est l’ambassadeur de France au Sénégal : Christophe Bigot avait affirmé que la France "avait 25 % des parts de marché au Sénégal, il y a 10 ans. Aujourd’hui, ses parts de marché sont passées de 25 à 15 %". C’est dire, à travers cet exemple, que nous ne nous intéressons pas qu’aux déclarations des politiciens locaux.
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/parts-de-marche-de-france-senegal-ne-sont-pas-passees-de-25-15-en-10-ans/
2) Et parlant de membres du gouvernement, en 2018, bon nombre de leurs déclarations ont, en effet, fait l’objet de vérification. Notamment en matière d’éducation : Deux affirmations de Macky Sall sur l’UCAD examinées ;Sénégal : les investissements sous Macky Sall dans le supérieur font-ils plus du double de ceux des 50 dernières années ?; Enseignants titulaires de doctorat : le Sénégal mieux loti que les pays anglo-saxons ?Celles ici énumérées sont fausses pour les unes et sans preuves pour les autres.
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/mackysall-affirmation-ucad/
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/enseignant-docteurs-senegal-mieux-loti-pays-anglo-saxons/
3) Mais n’hésitons pas aussi à publier des articles lorsque la déclaration que nous vérifions est vraie ; comme ici lorsque le président sénégalais Macky Sall avait affirmé que le Sénégal figure parmi les cinq pays les plus performants en Afrique dans la lutte contre le paludisme.
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/senegal-fort-contre-paludisme-afrique/
4) Il en est de même pour l’opposition sénégalaise. A titre d’exemple, quand un des principaux opposants, Malick Gackou, avait affirmé que le Sénégal avait déjà connu, en 2003 ou 2004 sous le régime du Président Abdoulaye Wade, des taux de croissance de l’ordre de 7,2 %, nous avions infirmé cette affirmation.Ou encore, lorsque Idrissa Seck, candidat à la présidentielle de février 2019, avait indiqué à tort que le Sénégal a connu une augmentation de 30 % de son PIB suite à un changement de mécanisme comptable.
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/taux-de-croissance-de-7-senegal-2003-2004-vraiment/
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/augmentation-de-30-du-pib/
5) Et lorsque nos vérifications nous amènent à conclure que la déclaration d’un opposant est vraie, une fois encore, nous n’hésitons pas à publier notre article. C’était le cas lorsque le député de l’opposition Mamadou Lamine Diallo, avait déclaré que la rénovation du Building administratif va coûter plus de 40 milliards FCFA à l’Etat pour un marché initial de 17 milliards FCFA.
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/senegal-la-refection-du-building-administratif-a-t-elle-coute-40-milliards-de-francs/
6) En Côte d’Ivoire aussi, lorsqu’une déclaration d’un membre du pouvoir était vraie, nous l’avons dit (La Côte d’Ivoire parmi les 20 pays aux systèmes de santé les moins performants au monde ?)
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/cote-divoire-parmi-20-pays-aux-systemes-de-sante-performants-monde/
7) …autant que lorsque des déclarations n’étaient pas conformes aux faits (La Côte d’Ivoire, pays africain qui connaît moins de coupures d’électricité ?).
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/cote-divoire-connait-moins-de-coupures-delectricite/
8) Des propos d’opposants ivoiriens ont aussi fait l’objet de vérification. Unefois encore, nous avons publié des articles lorsque les résultats de nos recherches indiquaient que les déclarations étaient fausses (Le droit du sol existait-il en Côte d’Ivoire en janvier 1972 ?)
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/droit-de-sol-existait-cote-divoire-janvier-1972/
9) … ou vraies : Anacarde : le producteur ivoirien deux fois moins rémunéré que son confrère burkinabè ?
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/cajou-producteur-ivoirien-moins-remunere-que-burkinabe/
10) Des affirmations de certains media, à l’exemple de Bloomberg, du quotidien sénégalais Les Echos ou encore le site d’information Actusen, ont aussi fait l’objet de vérification.
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/non-cote-divoire-na-realise-plus-grosse-operation-deurobond/
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/dakar-parmi-les-villes-les-plus-pauvres-dafrique/
Laurent Bigot Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Africa Check selects 13 English and 10 French fact-checks to prove scope and consistency of its work:
ENGLISH
N NIGERIA
3: https://africacheck.org/reports/buharis-2018-democracy-day-speech-7-main-claims-under-scrutiny/
IN KENYA
4: https://africacheck.org/reports/uhuru-kenyattas-2018-state-of-the-nation-address-fact-checked/
5: https://africacheck.org/reports/hit-or-miss-5-claims-by-kenyan-governors-fact-checked/
6: https://africacheck.org/reports/yes-kenyas-executive-takes-the-lions-share-of-funds-but-not-95/
IN SOUTH AFRICA
8: https://africacheck.org/reports/anc-2019-election-manifesto-factcheck/
10: https://africacheck.org/reports/sa-received-r6-1-billion-2017-us-not-r300-billion-da-mayor-claimed/
11: https://africacheck.org/reports/anc-job-creation-boast-ignores-sas-increased-unemployment-rate/
13: https://africacheck.org/reports/do-200000-abortions-many-a-repeat-take-place-in-sa-each-year/
2] IN FRENCH
2) https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/mackysall-affirmation-ucad/
3) https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/senegal-fort-contre-paludisme-afrique/
4) https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/taux-de-croissance-de-7-senegal-2003-2004-vraiment/
7) …autant que lorsque des déclarations n’étaient pas conformes aux faits (La Côte d’Ivoire, pays africain qui connaît moins de coupures d’électricité ?).
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/cote-divoire-connait-moins-de-coupures-delectricite/
8) https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/droit-de-sol-existait-cote-divoire-janvier-1972/
9) https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/cajou-producteur-ivoirien-moins-remunere-que-burkinabe/
10) https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/non-cote-divoire-na-realise-plus-grosse-operation-deurobond/
These examples show that Africa Check covers a variety of speakers (pro and anti-government, different countries and political parties, etc.) and that its fact-checks are non-partisan work.
The Africa Check team also explains how they maintain standards across fact-checks:
Africa Check selects claims to check based on the reach and importance of the claim to the public, and the potential impact it might have on society if not checked. Africa Check does not advocate for any matter except the availability of quality data. We seek to fact-check all relevant sides in any debate, and apply the same methodology to all our reports. The process is as follows:
START WITH THE CLAIM: We start every fact-checking report with the claim or claims someone has made. If the claim is sourced in a news report, the editor always seeks to verify with the speaker or their office exactly what was said and the context.
CHECK THE EVIDENCE: Once the claim is established, the most important step is to find good reliable sources of evidence to check the claim against. This is evidence in the public domain that verifies or contradicts what has been said, data from a public database, the findings of academic studies, the opinion of established experts, or other sources. Our reports are typically based on primary sources – a recording, a transcript, a database or other verifiable primary source if possible. Secondary sources are used where necessary but only if properly checked and attributed.
REPORT WRITING: The report format is standardised to follow a set pattern – a headline that is easy-to- read and deliver the report’s conclusion; a body that sets out the claim we are investigating and a conclusion based on our finding. We also summarise the claim and the finding in table for easy reference.
Claims made about health and social issues form a major part of our work, due to the context of the countries we work in. Nevertheless, we do cover claims made by political figures and institutions.
done_all 2a marked as Fully compliant by Laurent Bigot.
Criterion 2b
Nonpartisanship policy
Evidence required: Please share evidence of your policy preventing staff from direct involvement in political parties and advocacy organizations. Please also indicate the policy your organization has as a whole regarding advocacy and supporting political candidates.
Africa Check
14-Feb-2019 (5 years ago)
At their interview stage, all Africa Check staff are asked about current or past direct involvement in political or advocacy organisations. Candidates are not hired if they have in the past or at present held an active role in any political party. The fundamental importance for our work of non-partisanship is discussed regularly at staff meetings and staff are all required to ensure that their personal communication on social media meets these standards. Africa Check takes no advocacy position on any issue save for the importance of data transparency and accuracy. Africa Check never has and never will support any political party.
Laurent Bigot Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Africa Check explains its policies to preserve its non-partisan way of fact-checking claims on a page titled “Our principles” here:
https://africacheck.org/about-us/our-principles/
http://fr.africacheck.org/a-propos/nos-principes/
Its code of principles evokes :
"Africa Check is a non-partisan organisation that exists to promote accuracy and honesty in public debate and the media in Africa.To do this effectively, it is important that we stick to the best practices in fact-checking, recognised by leading non-partisan fact-checking organisations around the world, and that we adhere to the fundamental operating principles of commitment to impartiality, transparency and accuracy."
It precises that : “We fact-check claims using the same standard for every fact check. We do not concentrate our fact-checking on any one side. We follow the same process for every fact check and let the evidence dictate our conclusions. We do not advocate or take policy positions on the issues we fact-check.”
The Africa Check team also explains:
“At their interview stage, all Africa Check staff are asked about current or past direct involvement in political or advocacy organisations. Candidates are not hired if they have in the past or at present held an active role in any political party. The fundamental importance for our work of non-partisanship is discussed regularly at staff meetings and staff are all required to ensure that their personal communication on social media meets these standards. Africa Check takes no advocacy position on any issue save for the importance of data transparency and accuracy. Africa Check never has and never will support any political party.”
done_all 2b marked as Fully compliant by Laurent Bigot.
Section 3: Transparency of Sources
Criterion 3a
Sources Policy
Please share a brief and public explanation (500 words max) of how sources are provided in enough detail that readers could replicate the fact check. If you have a public policy on how you find and use sources for your fact-checking, it should be shared here.
Africa Check
14-Feb-2019 (5 years ago)
The process we use to produce our work hinges on being transparent about how we find and use sources in our reports, factsheets and guides.
Once a claim is established, the most important step is to find good reliable sources of evidence to check the claim against. This can be evidence in the public domain that verifies or contradicts what has been said, data from a public database, the findings of academic studies, the opinion of established experts, or other sources.
When we find good sources, they are added to both our report and to the resources section of the website – Info Finder (currently in testing but to be launched in 2019for others to use). Our rules are replicated in French and English.
• Always use primary sources if possible
We endeavour to use primary sources for all our report whether in the form of a recording, a transcript, a database or other verifiable primary source if possible. Secondary sources are used periodically where necessary but are properly checked and attributed.
• Databases and credible sources
The Info Finder section lists databases and studies that we found credible while researching our reports. When looking for credible studies and databases on new reports, the researcher searches here first. We also provide as much explanation as required about the quality of information and any relevant caveats to enable the reader to assess the likely accuracy of the information. We also try to provide some context to the source of data by explaining, where we can, how the data should be read and understood.
• Expert analysis
Where we cannot ourselves access data, we seek insight and quote an expert in the field as commentator. Where we do quote an expert, we identify clearly who they are, who they work for, and any allegiances they may have that might affect their analysis. We also state whether we spoke to them directly and when. And if we did not, we say where we got the remarks from.
• Use of anonymous sources
All the evidence we use is verifiable by us before we publish it. If a source agrees to send us information, but demands anonymity, we cannot use it as source material if it cannot be verified, either directly or indirectly, by our readers and us.
• Provide a link, PDF or other evidence where possible
Another guiding principle of Africa Check is that our reports should be not just verified, by us, but verifiable by our readers and that means we have to provide the evidence we base our judgements on – links, PDFS and other such documents – not just the judgements themselves. If such documents are used, we add them to the report and add them to the Info Finder section.
Laurent Bigot Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
The Africa Check’s code of principles mentions the transparency of sources and the transparency of methodology as important rules. Both the French and the English websites explain in details how readers can replicate the fact-check by their own means, thanks to the database of resources and advice the journalists have created. We can find it here :
https://africacheck.org/how-to-fact-check/tips-and-advice/
https://fr.africacheck.org/verifier-des-faits/conseils-et-recommandations/
Here is the Africa Check’s sources policy abstract:
“• Always use primary sources if possible
We endeavour to use primary sources for all our report whether in the form of a recording, a transcript, a database or other verifiable primary source if possible. Secondary sources are used periodically where necessary but are properly checked and attributed.
• Databases and credible sources
The Info Finder section lists databases and studies that we found credible while researching our reports. When looking for credible studies and databases on new reports, the researcher searches here first. We also provide as much explanation as required about the quality of information and any relevant caveats to enable the reader to assess the likely accuracy of the information. We also try to provide some context to the source of data by explaining, where we can, how the data should be read and understood.
• Expert analysis
Where we cannot ourselves access data, we seek insight and quote an expert in the field as commentator. Where we do quote an expert, we identify clearly who they are, who they work for, and any allegiances they may have that might affect their analysis. We also state whether we spoke to them directly and when. And if we did not, we say where we got the remarks from.
• Use of anonymous sources
All the evidence we use is verifiable by us before we publish it. If a source agrees to send us information, but demands anonymity, we cannot use it as source material if it cannot be verified, either directly or indirectly, by our readers and us.
• Provide a link, PDF or other evidence where possible
Another guiding principle of Africa Check is that our reports should be not just verified, by us, but verifiable by our readers and that means we have to provide the evidence we base our judgements on – links, PDFS and other such documents – not just the judgements themselves. If such documents are used, we add them to the report and add them to the Info Finder section..”
done_all 3a marked as Fully compliant by Laurent Bigot.
Section 4: Transparency of Funding & Organization
Criterion 4a
Funding Sources
Evidence required: Please link to the section where you publicly list your sources of funding (including, if they exist, any rules around which types of funding you do or don't accept), or a statement on ownership if you are the branch of an established media organization or research institution.
Africa Check
14-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
We set out how we are funded and how we spend our funds on this page on our English-language site, including references to our rules about funding. https://africacheck.org/about-us/how-we-are-funded/
And we do the same in French on this page: https://fr.africacheck.org/a-propos/comment-nous-sommes-finances/
Laurent Bigot Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Africa Check is a standalone fact-checking organization which is transparent about how it is funded.
The ownership of Africa Check and its rules about funding are all detailed here:
https://africacheck.org/about-us/how-we-are-funded/
https://fr.africacheck.org/a-propos/comment-nous-sommes-finances/
"Africa Check is a non-profit organisation, headquartered in South Africa as a non-profit Trust, registration number IT000728/2015(C). It is registered as Africa Check Foundation in Kenya and operates in Nigeria and Senegal through representative offices. Founded in London in 2012 as a Community Interest Company, control of the organisation passed to the SA-registered Trust at the start of 2019. Information on 2012-2017 accounts is available on this link at UK Companies House."
done_all 4a marked as Fully compliant by Laurent Bigot.
Criterion 4b
Staff
Evidence required: Please link to the section detailing all authors and key actors behind your fact-checking project with their biographies. You can also list the name and bios of the members of the editorial board, pool of experts, advisory board, etc. if your organization has those.
Africa Check
14-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
We list all our key staff and board here in English
https://africacheck.org/about-us/people/
And here in French
https://fr.africacheck.org/a-propos/notre-equipe/
Laurent Bigot Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
There’s a “people section” detailing authors behind the project and their biographies on Africa Check’s website, here:
https://africacheck.org/about-us/people
https://fr.africacheck.org/a-propos/notre-equipe
All the articles are signed by their author.
done_all 4b marked as Fully compliant by Laurent Bigot.
Criterion 4c
Contact
Evidence required: Please link to the section where readers can get in touch with the organization.
Africa Check
14-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
People can contact us in many ways - via a generic email address, via social media and through contacting our offices directly. All this is set out on our contact page shown here in English https://africacheck.org/about-us/contact-details/
And here in French
https://fr.africacheck.org/a-propos/contact/
Laurent Bigot Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
It’s easy for readers to contact Africa Check’s team: there’s a page that mentions all the addresses and phone numbers of the different Africa Check’s offices everywhere in Africa:
https://africacheck.org/about-us/contact-details/
http://fr.africacheck.org/a-propos/contact/
And there’s an generic email address on the footer of the website : info@africacheck.org
done_all 4c marked as Fully compliant by Laurent Bigot.
Section 5: Transparency of Methodology
Criterion 5a
Detailed Methodology
Evidence required: Please link to a section or article detailing the steps you follow for your fact-checking work.
Africa Check
14-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
We set out our methodology regularly in our fact-checks and in a series of "how to" guides that we publish online and discuss in trainings we do for reporters and the public. Examples of guides can be seen here: https://africacheck.org/how-to-fact-check/factsheets-and-guides/
In addition, we set out our methodology in detail on this page in English
https://africacheck.org/about-us/how-we-work/
And in this page in French
https://fr.africacheck.org/a-propos/comment-nous-travaillons/
Laurent Bigot Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Africa Check gives precisions about its fact-checking methodology, with a lot of details in two sections, in English :
https://africacheck.org/about-us/how-we-work/
https://africacheck.org/about-us/how-we-rate-claims/
And in French :
https://fr.africacheck.org/a-propos/comment-nous-travaillons/
https://fr.africacheck.org/a-propos/comment-nous-evaluons-les-declarations/
These details seem very clear and accessible in both websites.
done_all 5a marked as Fully compliant by Laurent Bigot.
Criterion 5b
Claim submissions
Evidence required: Please link to the page or process through which readers can submit claims to fact-check. If you do not allow this, please briefly explain why.
Africa Check
14-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
We regularly use our social media feeds to appeal (Twitter, Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram) to appeal to users to let us know if they think they have seen misinformation. This Tweet from our Nigeria office - written in pidgin - is an appeal to send in misinformation to our WhatsApp feed.
https://twitter.com/AfricaCheck_NG/status/1087640475924873217
At the same time, we have a page dedicated on the site to users sending in claims. The page provides clear guidance on what we can and cannot check and how we select what to chase up.
See here in English
https://africacheck.org/how-to-fact-check/submit-a-claim-to-check/
And here in French
https://fr.africacheck.org/verifier-des-faits/soumettre-une-declaration-a-verifier/
Laurent Bigot Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
There’s a dedicated page to invite readers to submit claims to fact-check on Africa Check’s websites. We can find it here:
https://africacheck.org/how-to-fact-check/submit-a-claim-to-check/
https://fr.africacheck.org/verifier-des-faits/soumettre-une-declaration-a-verifier/
And these pages are reachable from the menus and the websites’ homepages.
Both websites present to readers four rules to respect to submit a fact-checkable claim (sort of topic, fact or opinion, impact, already checked) and a specific form to send it to the staff.
The Africa Check staff also explains :
“We regularly use our social media feeds to appeal (Twitter, Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram) to appeal to users to let us know if they think they have seen misinformation. This Tweet from our Nigeria office - written in pidgin - is an appeal to send in misinformation to our WhatsApp feed.
https://twitter.com/AfricaCheck_NG/status/1087640475924873217”
done_all 5b marked as Fully compliant by Laurent Bigot.
Section 6: Open & Honest Corrections Policy
Criterion 6a
Corrections policy
Evidence required: Please link to the page with your policy to address corrections. If it is not public, please share your organization's handbook.
Africa Check
14-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Our corrections policy is set out here in English
https://africacheck.org/about-us/corrections/
And here in French
https://fr.africacheck.org/a-propos/politique-de-corrections/
Laurent Bigot Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
The Africa Check’s websites give precisions about its corrections policy in a specific webpage, here:
https://africacheck.org/about-us/corrections/
https://fr.africacheck.org/a-propos/politique-de-corrections
“User feedback and comment can be submitted in the comment section available under every article on our website or through an email to info@africacheck.org. Submissions through these channels are checked daily..”
done_all 6a marked as Fully compliant by Laurent Bigot.
Criterion 6b
Examples of corrections
Evidence required: Please provide two examples of a correction made, or correction requests handled, in the past year.
Africa Check
14-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Please see three examples of how we corrected mistakes made on our English-language site
1: In a story about the number of maternal deaths due to teenage moms a reader highlighted us that our data table was inaccurate. We updated this and made this clear in a note at the foot of the report.
https://africacheck.org/reports/yes-teenagers-account-for-10-of-deliveries-in-south-africa-but-not-half-the-maternal-deaths/
2: After we published a report into President Ramaphosa's State of the Nation Address 2018, an expert got in touch and provided evidence that our rating of a claim that nearly one million children are in early childhood development centres was incorrect. We had called it correct. With his help we corrected this rating to incorrect!
3: In our Facebook programme on false news, we mistakenly identified a genuine news article as a purveyor of such news. We corrected this after the genuine owner alerted us that a false news site had appropriated his organisation’s logo but under a different URL. We gave him space on our Comment section for a "right of reply" making this clear.
https://africacheck.org/2018/12/18/right-of-reply-african-daily-voice-did-not-publish-these-false-stories/
In French we misattributed remarks that we fact-checked in one report. Once we were alerted to this we immediately corrected, as shown below
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/frais-de-transfert-dargent-vers-lafrique-plus-chers-monde/ .
Laurent Bigot Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Africa Check tested its corrections policy in several fact-checks in the past year.
We can suggest the following examples for the English website:
Further reading: WHO figure wrong: 11% of births in sub-Saharan Africa to teen mothers – not 50%
UPDATE: The verdict for Ramaphosa's claim that "we have nearly one million children who are participating in early childhood development facilities“ has been changed from "correct" to "incorrect". New research shows that enrolment figures have been significantly underestimated. (08/01/2019)
And this one for the French-language website :
https://fr.africacheck.org/reports/frais-de-transfert-dargent-vers-lafrique-plus-chers-monde/ .
Nous avons attribué par erreur des propos tenus par l'économiste George Joseph de la Banque mondiale à Laura Bartolini. D'où la publication de ce rectificatif. Le reste est sans changement. Toutes nos excuses à Mme Bartolini et à nos lecteurs.