Information about our organization's legal status can be found directly in the website section of the APA-Faktencheck (APA fact check): http://go.apa.at/kAzVcaee.

APA-Faktencheck is a section of APA – Austria Press Agency. The APA – Austria Press Agency is the national news agency and the leading Austrian information service provider. It is owned by 12 Austrian daily newspapers and the Austrian national television broadcasting network ORF. APA fulfils its duties independently of the state, government and parties, according to the principles of reliability, speed and balance, as well as avoiding one-sidedness or partisanship. 

General information about APA: http://go.apa.at/1LpjmLeU

The APA (Austrian Press Agency) is a registered cooperative company owned by several private media and the country’s public broadcaster ORF, which has an institutionalized corporatized governance model including political parties and other societal stakeholders. These shareholders are not involved in the daily business, and the agency is committed to independent and fact-based news procurement (https://apa.at/about/about-apa-gruppe/).

1. The APA fact check, which was created in February 2020, is aimed at creating a better response to the increasing danger of targeted disinformation, which is especially wide-spread via the digital networks. As the leading information provider in Austria, systematic fact-checking and careful research have been an elementary part of the APA journalists’ daily work for decades. In the APA fact check department, this knowledge is used to be prepared for tough cases, and in order to carry out complex verification processes. With the initiation of the APA fact check, the Austria Press Agency aims to do its part in the global fight against fake news and use the available expertise to give the citizens a better chance of objectively catagorising information.

2. The APA fact check team consists of seven people. The team is led and coordinated by verification officer Florian Schmidt, who also plays an important role in producing the fact check itself. In addition, a number of journalists from other APA news departments make up the fact check team, in order to use the expert knowledge provided by specialists, and to create new synergy. These team members work as necessary on finding topics, research or production.

3. The main job of the APA fact check is the examination of claims that are relevant for the general populace. This predominantly covers current and viral information, but readers are also invited to send in suggestions. The examination of claims is then published in the fact check, transparently and in a way that is accessible to readers. In addition, the verification officer regularly trains both colleagues within the APA, as well as external people interested in research and information possibilities or in verification tools.

4. The goal in the coming year is to expand the APA fact check department and establish the products as high-demand and appreciated by readers. The department should not only constantly increase the available competences, but also intensify the knowledge transfer and the transmission of important research techniques and relevant experiences to interested people. In addition, more technical aid development is planned for the fact-checking process. 

The APA Faktencheck team has a designated team comprising six experts and a verification officer, Florian Schmidt, who leads and coordinates the group. The dedicated fact-checking department has been founded in February 2020 (first fact-check published on 28th of February 2020) as “a response to the increasing danger of targeted disinformation”.

Please refer to the second file with 28 fact checks. Due to technical issues we couldn't remove the older version.

The provided data contain 28 fact-checks within a timeframe of about 12 weeks resulting in a bit more than two fact-checks per week. Considering the last six months (from May 2020 to October 2020), APA Faktencheck produced 41 fact-checks, equaling approx. 1,5 fact-checks per week (https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Aktuelle_APA-Faktenchecks.html).

The provided fact-checks cover topics of public interest. Besides a strong focus on CoVid-related issues, they deal with claims concerning the economy, migration/refugees, and other relevant political affairs (military, crime, etc.). This criterion holds true for all provided fact-checks with the arguable exception of one case (about the songs chanted by Italians during lockdown). A review of the 37 pieces produced since then exhibited only one similar case, and the ratio of fact-checks of public interest topics is undoubtedly above the 75% mark.

The Austria Press Agency does not receive any general state funding (such as press subsidies). As a privately-organised, independent company, APA is owned by 12 Austrian daily newspapers and the public broadcaster ORF. Together, these guarantee the independence and non-partisanship of the APA. Public institutions as well as parties are customers of the APA group, and obtain their products from IT, communication services, and the news department.

The business relations are handled by the sales department; the news department is not involved.

Two news department projects have public funding: The ministry for social affairs funds the production of news in simple language (APA-TopEasy) so that this service can be made available to NGOs in the disabled care sector. The communication platform APA-Science is financed by the leading players in the Austrian science landscape, including responsible institutions and funding bodies, research institutions, innovative companies, universities, and education networks. 

The applicant explains the company’s basic structure and business model and states to receive no general state funding, except for two projects that do not directly touch the fact-checking department. Detailed finance reports are publicly available (https://apa.at/about/facts-figures/), and the company, as well as the fact-checking project, declare their journalistic independence and outline general rules and safeguards to do so (https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Aufbau_und_redaktionelle_Grundsaetze.html). Given these conditions and APA’s history, the editorial work can be assumed with high probability.

https://www.apa.at/Site/Nachrichtenagentur/The_value_of_Information.de.html 

https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Aufbau_und_redaktionelle_Grundsaetze.html 

https://science.apa.at/site/home/kooperation.html?marsname=/Lines/Science/Koop/topeasy

https://science.apa.at/site/home/ueberuns.html

Besides the links stated above (1.5), the last two links provide detailed insights into the cooperations linked to state funding, the company’s independence, and the designation of its own content and partner content.

In addition to the strict obligation of impartiality in the entire APA, the APA fact check team also makes certain not to take sides in the selection or the production of the fact checks.

I) The selected fact checks underline the efforts to examine claims from more than one party or political side, and to make sure of a balanced proportion of fact checks on politicians from all parties. Due to the corona crisis, there have been almost exclusively non-political fact checks in the months so far. In political fact checks, which will make up an undetermined number of stories in future, the team will continue to be careful to examine the claims by different parties using the same set of criteria. In all fact checks, the same high standards are applied, such as careful research, the uncovering of primary sources or reliable secondary sources, the (often not possible or not fruitful) contact with the people making the claims, the work with verification tools, the transparent documentation of all research steps or the presentation of contradictory statements or contradictory stances. 

II) The development and structure of every fact check follows the same pattern: First a claim is reproduced, and then immediately followed by an assessment, so that readers are made aware right away if the claim is false. This is followed by a comprehensive and transparent examination of what is true or false about the claim, with the help of publicly-available sources.

III) Assessments will only be made following researched facts. The selected fact checks show the compliance with strict criteria for the examination of claims, as well how exactly the conclusions were reached. It is the goal of the APA fact check team that readers can reconstruct every step of the fact check for themselves.

1. http://go.apa.at/lTTrye25 

2. http://go.apa.at/LtJO1LfS 

3. http://go.apa.at/Me33FB1z 

4. http://go.apa.at/2gbt1ccM 

5. http://go.apa.at/1EDz1mYl 

6. http://go.apa.at/gYBCKeN2 

7. http://go.apa.at/wj0QJ4E0 

8. http://go.apa.at/5w6JvEai 

9. http://go.apa.at/Q1FyNdha 

10. http://go.apa.at/xTUqFs4C 

As the applicant declares, most fact-checks concern CoVid 19-related topics and therefore do not explicitly address statements made by politicians. The provided examples comprise a few fact-checks involving claims made by politicians or issues notably related to single politicians, and the review of additional fact-checks involves a few more. These examples do not show any sign of partisanship, and they follow a consistent structure that focuses on the claim and its verification with little regard to the author, except for useful information or if he or she is relevant for the validation itself.

 https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Regeln_fuer_den_Faktencheck.html 

Again, the fact-checks cover almost exclusively health-related fact-checks due to the corona pandemic. However, the fact-checks covering politicians do not show any sign of unduly concentration on any onde political side, and the pieces concerning CoVid 19 cover a wide range of aspects as well. The applicant further provides detailed information about the selection process, and the reviewed articles meet these criteria.

The review of the sources used by APA Faktencheck shows a focus on primary data and explanations by relevant individuals (like experts or press officers), whose statements are almost always contextualized by information about the individuals’ positions, his/her expertise and knowledge base, and if applicable: interests (very rare since hardly present).

There are no signs of political support and partisanship by the APA, its public statements, or the project’s fact-checks.

https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Aufbau_und_redaktionelle_Grundsaetze.html

https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Aufbau_und_redaktionelle_Grundsaetze.html

Update 21. 1. 2021: We clarified on our homepage that all non-partizanship standards and journalistic principles are mandatory for APA journalists. They have to comply with in-house guidelines.

APA Faktencheck does not explicitly state a policy on how staff demonstrates non-partisanship. Still, a review of their social media accounts and the organization’s one did not reveal any clear personal support for politicians or parties.

APA Faktencheck does explicitly state a policy that its members have to comply with non-partisanship and journalistic principles, whcih further safeguarded by internal guidelines.

APA Faktencheck discloses all sources used and provides links or files them in archives to ensure readers access.

APA Faktencheck uses primary data where possible and relies on high-quality sources to verify claims and provide useful information. It draws on secondary sources if necessary and flags these situations by providing additional information about the source (see also 2.3).

APA Faktencheck relies in most cases on appropriate high-quality sources or accurate proof that justify the use of single sources, and it draws in multiple evidence in situations that are more complicated or when the point in question is extraordinarily essential.

The situation hardly occurs, but if so the project does disclose the sources' interests (see also 2.3).

APA-Faktencheck is the fact-checking section of APA - Austria Presse Agentur. 

https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Aufbau_und_redaktionelle_Grundsaetze.html

Press release: http://go.apa.at/aZkSq05m 

APA Faktencheck is evidently a new fact-checking unit of the Austrian Press Agency.

https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Aufbau_und_redaktionelle_Grundsaetze.html 

APA Faktencheck states the general structure and business model of its parent company on its project website and provides links to the company’s most recent annual reports.

organization structure: https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Aufbau_und_redaktionelle_Grundsaetze.html

team: https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Faktencheck-Team.html 

APA Faktencheck explains on its project website the organizational structure of the parent company, how the unit is embedded in it, and who has editorial responsibilities. Further, readers can easily find detailed information about this issue on APA’s homepage if they are interested in the parent company’s organizational structure in more general.

https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Faktencheck-Team.html 

APA Faktencheck provides detailed information about the members of the core team and its coordinator.

https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Kontakt.html 

APA Faktencheck has a dedicated webpage that provides readers an email address and Twitter handle to get in touch or to submit claims, explaining what kind of claims they can expect to be verified.

https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Regeln_fuer_den_Faktencheck.html 

https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Regeln_fuer_den_Faktencheck.html 

Update 21. 1. 2021: We added information on our homepage on how we deal with the statement's authors, especially with politicians.

APA Faktencheck provides a detailed section on its website explaining the proceeding and the applied criteria for claim selection and verification, the quality standards used, and the standard structure of its published fact-checks. The applicant’s fact-checks consistently follow a unified structure and meet the criteria outlined in the methodology. This includes an introduction into the issue with one or more examples of the claim’s occurrence, the explicit pointing out of the facts to be checked, the presentation of the results in a short paragraph, and the detailed verification of the issue in question.

The methodology should address more clearly how the project deals with the statements' authors. As noted under 5.5, this aspect is not so relevant right now since the project verifies primarily claims emerging on social media, but it would be essential when it comes to explicit statements made by politicians.

APA Faktencheck provides a detailed section on its website explaining the proceeding and the applied criteria for claim selection and verification, the quality standards used, and the standard structure of its published fact-checks. The applicant’s fact-checks consistently follow a unified structure and meet the criteria outlined in the methodology. This includes an introduction into the issue with one or more examples of the claim’s occurrence, the explicit pointing out of the facts to be checked, the presentation of the results in a short paragraph, and the detailed verification of the issue in question.

The review of a sample of the applicant’s fact-checks evidences a strong focus on issues/claims of public relevance. That is the presumed public benefit of verifying the claim and its public reach regarding media attention or social media sharing and likes.

The review of a sample of the applicant’s fact-checks shows a weighing of relevant evidence supporting and undermining the claim, and the indication of missing evidence, if applicable.

The review of a sample of the applicant’s fact-checks does not indicate unequal handling of claims and evidence depending on their authors (again: a very small number of fact-checks deals with explicit statements of politicians).

Since APA Faktencheck has focused primarily on CoVid 19 related claims on social media, contacting the source is usually not feasible and does not happen. The applicant states to seek a comment of the claim’s author where possible (see 2.1), but this aspiration is not part of the public methodology and should be addressed in the future, especially if the project turns more towards verifying politicians’ statements.

The APA-Faktencheck calls on readers to send in topic suggestions for the fact checks: https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Kontakt.html  A mail address is made available on every fact check story, and is also on a pinned post in the Liveblog tool used for fact checks. In addition, the APA-Faktencheck can be reached via its Twitter account: https://twitter.com/APA_Faktencheck  

The APA-Faktencheck also points out to readers that we can only examine claims which follow our rules for the APA-Faktenchecks. The rules are listed here: https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/Regeln_fuer_den_Faktencheck.html 

We make clear, that topics relevant for fact checking include questionable information or claims that “go viral” and garner social interest, or if they have an effect on decision-making for a large number of people. These can be news topics with a lot of media attention, or even social media posts with a lot of “shares”. A certain reach is a necessary criteria. Questionable postings in closed forums or postings without much interaction are not relevant as a rule.

The selection of fact checks can be on all topics and in all socially-relevant areas of life. The APA fulfils its responsibilities independently of state, government and parties according to the standards of reliability, speed, balance and avoidance of any partisanship or one-sidedness. The fact check team selects its topics for examination, bearing these guidelines in mind. 

See 4.5: APA Faktencheck has a dedicated website that provides readers an email address and Twitter handle to get in touch or to submit claims, explaining what kind of claims they can expect to be verified.

https://multimedia.apa.at/Site/APA-Faktencheck/korrekturregeln.html 

The applicant dedicates a visible and easy to access webpage to the issue of corrections and invites readers to submit feedback on its "contact us" webpage.

The applicant provides a detailed correction and complaints policy that explains how it deals with mistakes and how it marks corrections to enable the consumer to trace changes.

If we notice major errors in our fact checks, or if we are confronted with legitimate interjections, then it is of utmost concern to us to quickly and transparently correct the fact checks in question. This is aimed at avoiding further readers from seeing the uncorrected version. Due to the live blog format, mistakes can be easily corrected, so that even the already-shared links to the older stories will lead to the corrected versions.

In mid-May, we examined the rumour that Ibuprofen was contributing to a more serious disease progression in people with the Covid-19 virus. Part of our fact check was a current warning by the WHO, which advised people not to take Ibuprofen without consulting a doctor first. However, a few days after the fact check, the WHO warning was withdrawn, which the fact check team and readers both noticed. The fact check was subsequently corrected.

http://go.apa.at/8rQboU7e  

On May 20, we looked at how many Covid-19 tests were being held in Vienna. For this, we examined an Excel file from the office of city councillor Peter Hacker and found that the figures had a calculation error, but that was not relevant for the figures in the original fact check. Following this, a member of office contacted us to explain his view of the data. We could then follow the calculation course, and corrected the fact check by removing the section in question. 

http://go.apa.at/2gbt1ccM 

The examples provided by the applicant demonstrate the adherence to the outlined correction policy and visibly highlight and explain changes made.

no existing signatory at the moment

Not applicable.

https://www.apa.at/Site/Nachrichtenagentur/Die_Redaktion.de.html

Please refer to file "APA_KORREKTUREN". Due to technical issues we couldn't remove the older version.

The applicant’s parent company has a clear correction policy and follows professional quality standards. Examples of corrections demonstrate the adherence to these standards.