Colombiacheck is a project conceived and developed by Consejo de Redacción (CdR), a Colombian NGO that promotes investigative journalism in Colombia since 2008. This project was launched in June, 2016, and it is currently the only media outlet mainly dedicated to fact-checking in the country.

In our website we clearly declare that CdR is the organization behind our work in the ‘About us’ and FAQ’s pages ( https://colombiacheck.com/sobre-nosotros.html and https://colombiacheck.com/preguntas-frecuentes ) and also in the site’s footer.

In the attached file, you can find a document that certifies CdR's legal registration.

Affiliated with Consejo de Redacción (CdR), a Colombian non-governmental organization dedicated to advancing investigative journalism since 2008, ColombiaCheck is a fact-checking organizations established in June 2016. For the purpose of this assessment, it has provided comprehensive details on its inception, legal status, personnel, undertakings, and objectives. The statutes of Consejo de Redacción, along with a wealth of information about ColombiaCheck, can be accessed on the 'About Us' (Sobre nosotros) page of their website.

1. When and why was your fact-checking operation started?

Colombiacheck was created in June, 2016, as a project to fight misinformation stemming from the peace process that was being held in Havana, Cuba, between the Colombian Government and the then FARC guerrilla. It has evolved since to cover a wider agenda, such as public discourse in general, electoral campaigns, the COVID-19 pandemic, and other mis- and disinformation.

2. How many people work or volunteer in the organization and what are their roles?

At the time of this application, Colombiacheck’s team comprises 12 people: a director, an editor, a sub-editor, five staff reporters, a community manager, a content creator, a graphic designer and a webmaster. We also work with some freelancers, allied media outlets and other organizations on specific projects, but their works must go through Colombiacheck’s editorial process before being published.

3. What different activities does your organization carry out?

Colombiacheck publishes fact-checks in written articles and social media content, same as pre-bunking notes and investigations, some of them from alliances like Liga contra el Silencio. We also train journalists from other media outlets and different audiences (NGO, students, teachers, etc.) on techniques and tools to verify public discourse or internet mis- and disinformation, given that CdR is an association that advocates for investigative journalism practice and promotion in Colombia.

4. What are the goals of your fact-checking operation over the coming year?

Our main goal for next year is to obtain the necessary resources to maintain a network of collaborators in different regions of the country over time and resume other projects. In addition, strengthen our social media presence, especially using videos for digital literacy.

ColombiaCheck has provided comprehensive information on all the aspects requested for compliance in this criterion. Specifically, it has presented details on the following:

1. The establishment of this fact-checking initiative in 2016, with the rationale behind its inception to encompass a broader scope, including public discourse, electoral campaigns, the COVID-19 pandemic, and tackling disinformation.

2. As of 2023, the organization employed a workforce of 12 people, each designated with specific roles. This marked a slight increase in staffing of 1 employee compared to the previous assessment in 2022, when 11 workers were counted.

3. A detailed account of the various activities currently undertaken by the applicant, which included not only fact-checking but also pre-bunking and journalists training activities.

4. The goals for ColombiaCheck in the forthcoming year of 2024, which involve maintaining a network of collaborators spanning various regions of the country, amplifying ongoing projects, and distributing videos to advance digital literacy.

In the last six months (since May 1 and up to Oct. 31), we have published a total of 271 fact-checks on our website, for an average of 10,31 per week. A spreadsheet with all these fact-checks is attached. This does not include pre-bunking articles and investigations on disinformation narratives that we call ‘explicadores’ (explainers) or any other kind of content we produce or reproduce, not even fact-checks by allies that were only published under our regional network RedCheq’s site.

ColombiaCheck has provided the complete roster of fact-checks, totaling 271, published during the six-month period from May to October 2023. This compilation serves as evidence that the applicant significantly exceeds the minimum requirement of publishing at least one fact-check per week. It is also worth mentioning that this number of data checks is more than double the number of fact-checks (134) carried out by the applicant during six months in the previous year.

During the examined three-month period from October to December 2023, more than 75% of the fact-checks concentrated on claims associated with matters directly affecting the welfare, well-being, or broader societal interests in Colombia. These fact-checks primarily delved into national political issues, but also extended to other topics including the economy, health, environmental news, and more.

We do not have any commercial, financial, or institutional relationship with the Colombian state or government, nor with any of the country’s politicians.

Our internal regulations (CdR's statute) state that “the associates must declare conflicts of interest between their professional functions and the objectives and activities of the organization, inform of any situation that goes against the principles of CdR and announce when they stop exercising the journalistic profession”: https://consejoderedaccion.org/asociados/registrarse

Also, Colombiacheck's code of principles states that “We do not defend any ideology, nor do we carry out political activism or of any other type”: https://colombiacheck.com/metodologia.html

When hired, our journalists commit to follow both principles.

Our financial sources are described here: https://colombiacheck.com/sobre-nosotros , and are summarized as follows for 2023 up to October:

Meta (87,05%), Internews (6,43%), Fundación La Voz Pública para la Verificación del Discurso Público (4,98%), Asociación de Periodismo con Lupa (0,98%) and Microsoft Store Support (0,57%). That’s about a total of 813,8 million COP, roughly 206.189 USD at the exchange rate on December 14, 2023 (see attached file).

According to its 2023 balance sheet (from January to October), the main source of financing was Meta, accounting for more than 87% of the income. Other funding sources and donors included Internews (6.4%), Fundación La Voz Pública para la Verificación del Discurso Público (5%), Asociación de Periodismo con Lupa (1%), and Microsoft Store Support (0.6%). This financing breakdown affirms compliance with the requirement that ColombiaCheck does not maintain commercial, financial or institutional ties with the state, politicians or political parties in the countries it covers.

As described above, we do not receive such kind of funding.

To the best of the assessor's knowledge, ColombiaCheck's editorial content remains free from influence by the state, political parties, politicians, or pressure groups. The connection with its parent organization, Consejo de Redaccion, which boasts more than 130 affiliated members across 21 departments in Colombia, safeguards this diversity and independence.

The following fact-checks show that we fact-check all sides of the Colombian political spectrum. They also make explicit the steps we follow in each public discourse fact-check: 1. contact the person who made the statement to be fact-checked. 2. consult official sources. 3. consult non-official sources. 4. consult non-biased experts in the field, or at least a balanced mix. 5. contextualize the fact-check. 6 rate. Five of the examples are social media fact-checks. In those, we can't consult the person who made a statement, but we follow the other steps, regardless.

Example 1 checks questionable claims from both sides of a Twitter argument between presidents of Colombia, Gustavo Petro, and El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, about their security policies. Examples 2 and 3 include multiple claims by the chief of State on his first annual accountability speech before Congress and the rejoinder to his intervention by one of the leading opposition senators, María Fernanda Cabal. Example 4 found questionable opposite claims from Petro and his predecessor, Iván Duque, about a Constitutional Court’s ruling on internet insufficiently explained cut-offs during protests against that previous government. Example 5 contains two claims on migration, both true, from opposing leading candidates to be the next Mayor of Bogota.

Examples 6 and 7 equally rate false similar viral claims that intend to link the president, in one case, and the main opposition party, in the other, to criminals who were involved in the kidnapping of Luis Manuel Díaz, soccer player Luis Díaz’s father. Examples 8 and 9 show two contents, an image and a video, respectively used to criticize and convoque anti-government demonstrations with equally questionable data. Finally, example 10 refers to a photo montage that shows Petro next to drug lord Pablo Escobar, detailing that a very similar one had circulated previously but the affected political figure was one of the president’s biggest opponents: former president Álvaro Uribe.

All the fact-checks argue their ratings with the evidence found for each.

1. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/la-pelea-tuitera-de-petro-y-bukele-fue-una-exhibicion-de-datos-cuestionables-sobre

2. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/mentiras-y-verdades-de-petro-en-su-primer-ano-ante-el-congreso

3. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/discurso-replica-de-cabal-petro-el-20-de-julio-tuvo-dos-frases-verdadera-pero-y-una

4. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/los-cuestionables-trinos-de-petro-y-duque-tras-sentencia-sobre-cortes-de-internet-en-paro

5. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/galan-y-bolivar-aciertan-sobre-una-migracion-joven-y-en-edad-laboral-presente-en-bogota

6. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/alias-marlon-capturado-por-secuestro-de-luis-m-diaz-no-fue-coordinador-del-centro

7. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/mujer-que-aparece-en-este-video-no-es-alias-patricia-responsable-del-secuestro-del-papa-de

8. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/imagen-que-critica-el-paro-contra-petro-expone-supuestos-logros-con-datos-cuestionables

9. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/video-invita-paro-nacional-en-febrero-con-datos-cuestionables-atribuidos-al-gobierno-petro

10. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/foto-de-petro-con-pablo-escobar-es-un-montaje-ya-habia-circulado-uno-similar-pero-con

ColombiaCheck has effectively showcased its impartiality by furnishing the requested 10 examples of fact-checks targeting politicians, political parties, and leaders across the entire political spectrum in Colombia. In conducting these fact-checks, ColombiaCheck adheres to a robust fact-checking methodology, substantiating information with credible sources and maintaining consistent standards, irrespective of the ideological alignment of the institution, political party, or individual under scrutiny.

https://colombiacheck.com/metodologia

ColombiaCheck transparently outlines its methodology to select claims to check and to prevent any bias or disproportionate focus on any ideological side during the fact-checking process.

After conducting a random review of fact-checks released in the previous year (January - December 2023), no evidence has been found suggesting any commercial interests that might have the potential to influence the fact-checking activity of the applicant.

Consistent with criterion 2.3, after conducting a random evaluation of multiple fact-checks released in the past year (January - December 2023), no indications have been detected of any political or ideological interests that might potentially influence the fact-checking efforts of the applicant.

https://colombiacheck.com/sobre-nosotros

On its 'About us' page (Sobre nosotros), ColombiaCheck self-defines as a "journalistic project, independent of the commercial and political tensions inherent in private enterprise."On that same page, the applicant declares that ColombiaCheck is a project of Consejo de Redacción, which is described as "a non-profit, non-partisan organization."

After conducting a random evaluation of various fact-checks published in the recent months, the use of links to substantiate the fact-checks on the applicant is deemed adequate and appropriate. These references empower users to autonomously verify the relevant information provided.

According to the assessor's knowledge, the sources used by the applicant to back fact-checks are sufficiently reliable and diversified. 

After a random review of a number of fact-checks published over the previous year (January - December 2023), the overall assessment for this criterion is positive. ColombiaCheck adequately contextualizes the sources that provide evidence on the subjects fact-checked.

The applicant offers sufficient details for readers to reasonably identify the interests that could influence the accuracy of the presented evidence. It effectively provides context for the sources used to substantiate the fact-checks.

Colombiacheck is a fact-checking project created as part of Consejo de Redacción (CdR), an independent association of journalists. The “About Us” section on CdR’s website includes us in one of its working approaches: https://consejoderedaccion.org/sobre-cdr

ColombiaCheck is a fact-checking project founded by the independent association of journalists Consejo de Redacción (CdR). This circumstance is disclosed on the 'About Us' page (Sobre CdR) page of the parent organization and is clearly showed in the navigation menus of both sites.

The ‘About Us’ and FAQs pages in Colombiacheck’s website state we are a project by Consejo de Redacción: https://colombiacheck.com/sobre-nosotros / https://colombiacheck.com/preguntas-frecuentes

It’s also in our footer at https://colombiacheck.com like it’s showed in the attached file.

Created by the non-profit Consejo de Redaccción, ColombiaCheck openly discloses this relationship with its parent organization. 

https://colombiacheck.com/sobre-nosotros

On its 'About us' page (Sobre nosotros), ColombiaCheck reveals the identities of its eight key staff members on its website, including brief biographies and information about their professional background. This same webpage provides a general contact email address.

1. https://consejoderedaccion.org/webs/EquipoCdR/index.html#colombiacheck

2. https://colombiacheck.com/sobre-nosotros 

ColombiaCheck and its parent organization, Consejo de Redacción, identify their primary staff members with reasonably detailed information (see here for ColombiaCheck and here for CdR). However, both entities lack personal contact details or social media handles in their profiles, which would be recommended for enhanced transparency.

Our email, WhatsApp number and social media can be found at the end of this section: https://colombiacheck.com/sobre-nosotros

Mailto and different social media links can also be found in other buttons in the main page, as highlighted in the attached files.

Colombiacheck offers various contact options on its About Us page, including a general email address (contacto@colombiacheck.com), an online contact form, social media handles, and a WhatsApp number. All these means of contact are clearly highlighted in the top of the frontpage.

https://colombiacheck.com/metodologia

Colombiacheck openly discloses its fact-checking methodology, which is deemed sound and reliable. The explanation about the methodology is clear and detailed.

Based on a random examination of several fact-checks published in the six months leading up to this assessment, no instances of non-compliance with this criterion have been identified for ColombiaCheck.

Drawing upon a number of randomly selected fact-checks, the assessor has come to the conclusion that ColombiaCheck commits to transparency and fairness when processing claims. 

No evidence has been found of the eventual usage of different standards for fact-checking, depending on who made the claim, or the subject checked.

In the applicant's randomly selected sample of fact-checks, no instances corresponding to the objectionable situations outlined in this criterion have been observed. Given the absence of evidence indicating any misconduct or violation of this aspect of the Code of Principles, the assessment is positive.

Our methodology ( https://colombiacheck.com/metodologia ) states we do not fact-check opinions or private claims, and that “selection is done with no biases, or preferences for ideology, sexual orientation, race or religion”. Our “About Us” page ( https://colombiacheck.com/sobre-nosotros ) includes a section titled “How to contribute?” where we share our contact information: e-mail and social media including a WhatsApp number. We encourage users to “propose claims to check, provide data and knowledge, as well as warn about possible errors in our team’s checks.” We also constantly take fact-check requests at out Twitter and TikTok accounts, both @Colcheck.

Colombiacheck has provided details regarding its approach to encouraging users to submit claims for fact-checking, contribute data and knowledge, and report potential errors in their team's evaluations. This engagement is facilitated through email and social media profiles.

"Correcciones y actualizaciones" part of https://colombiacheck.com/metodologia 

Colombiacheck has a sound corrections policy, explained its methodology page. It is worth mentioning that, following the recommendation of the 2022 IFCN assessment, the applicant changed the term 'clarifications' (clarificaciones) to 'corrections' (correcciones).

ColombiaCheck's corrections policy is deemed satisfactory and it is explained in reasonable detail. The explanation provides readers with clear insight into how their claims will be addressed in advance.

The Colombiacheck staff always replies to messages from those fact-checked who want to clarify their statements, or who want to dispute a rating, whether they are received via email, social media, messaging apps, or phone calls. We also reply to messages from others who share important information that can change the content or the rating of a fact-check.

An example of the first instance was a private message we received from a user who alerted us that we had misinterpreted a decree on a discount for certain vehicles to incentivize their owners to acquire the mandatory traffic accidents insurance (SOAT, in Spanish). We said it also reduced the policy coverage, which was not true. So we wrote an entire new article to correct the rating of the viral video, from questionable to false, and added the correction in the original, linking to the new one.

Original: https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/articulo-errado-descuento-del-50-en-el-soat-no-reduce-su-cobertura-aunque-el-borrador-si

Corrected: https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/correccion-descuento-de-50-en-soat-nunca-se-planteo-con-reduccion-en-la-cobertura

For the second instance, we present a fact-check to an official Presidency video on the achievements of the current government before its first anniversary. We consulted its press team but they only responded after the article was already published, so we included an update clarifying that we made some changes to include their answers but still kept the rates to every claim.

https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/gobierno-petro-exagera-en-video-sobre-lo-que-ha-hecho-para-cambiar-el-pais-en-menos-de-un

For the purposes of this assessment, ColombiaCheck has submitted two examples of a corrected (December 29, 2022) and an updated article (July 15, 2023). Both examples demonstrate that the applicant is diligent in responding to correction requests so, in the absence of evidence indicating any misconduct, the assessment of this aspect of the Code of Principles is positive.

https://colombiacheck.com/sobre-nosotros

Colombiacheck is a signatory of the IFCN Code of Principles since 2018. As requested, it informs users on how to proceed in case they want to inform IFCN of any violation of the Code of Principles.

Our parent organization, the association Consejo de Redacción (CdR), has committed in its mission to “promote investigative journalism in Colombia” and to develop processes that integrate the production of “quality contents”. Colombiacheck, including its public corrections policy, is part of these. You can find this information here: https://consejoderedaccion.org/sobre-cdr 

ColombiaCheck is associated with a parent organization, the association Consejo de Redacción, which Vision and Mission align with a fair and open corrections policy.