Colombiacheck is a project conceived and developed by Consejo de Redacción (CdR), a Colombian NGO that promotes investigative journalism in Colombia. 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.

Bound to Consejo de Redacción (CdR), a Colombian NGO that promotes investigative journalism since 2008, Colombiacheck has provided detailed information about the origin, legal status, staff, activities, and goals of the organization, founded in June 2016. The statutes of Consejo de Redacción, as well as most of the information about of Colombiacheck re also available in the 'About us' (Sobre nosotros) page of their website.

Colombiacheck is a fact-checking organization, launched in June 2016 by Consejo de Redacción (CdR), a Colombian NGO that promotes investigative journalism since 2008. As requested, the applicant has provided details about the origin, legal status, staff, activities, and goals of the organization. This information is also available in in its website at the 'About us' (Sobre nosotros) and FAQ (Preguntas frecuentes) pages. Proof of the legal status of Consejo de Redacción has been also attached to the application.

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 11 people: a director, an editor, a sub-editor, four staff reporters (including a science journalist), a community manager, a graphic designer, a webmaster, and an administrative coordinator. 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 various formats: written articles, videos and social media stories; some of them are also shared on analog media, such as flip charts, in regions where internet access is limited, as part of a special program on Venezuelan migration; along with 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. 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 goals for the next year are to cover regional and local elections extensively, in a new environment given the historic shift to the left on power that our country took this year, expanding our operation to new uncovered territories through more alliances; to strengthen our impact on social media with our multimedia formats to grow our loyal audience; and to explore new boundaries to spread fact-checking on and off line.

Colombiacheck has presented detailed information on the aspects requested to qualify this criterion as compliant:

1. The year (2016) and the reasons why this fact-checking operation started, which include "cover(ing) a wider agenda, such as public discourse in general, electoral campaigns, the COVID-19 pandemic, and other mis- and disinformation."

2. The amount of people (11) who work in the organization in 2022, indicating their respective roles. Nevertheless this number supposes a decrease in the workforce of 7 employees less, compared to the previous assessment of 2021.

3. The multiple activities that the applicant is carrying out.

4. The goals that Colombiacheck is pursuing over the coming year, which comprise covering regional and local elections, setting up new alliances to expand its activities, to strengthen its impact on social media, and to explore new spheres for fact-checking.

In the last six months (since Mar. 1 and up to Aug. 31), we have published a total of 331 fact-checks on our website, for an average of 12,59 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.

Colombiacheck has presented the full list of fact-checks (134) publised over the six-month period assessed (March to August, 2022). This sample proves that the applicant clearly surpasses the minimum of publishing at least one fact-check a week.

Upon a random review of multiple fact-checks published over the year 2022, we have come to the conclusion that more than 75% of Colombiacheck’s fact checks focus on claims related to issues that relate to or could have an impact on the welfare or well-being of individuals, the general public or society in Colombia. On the year assessed, the topics fact-checked range from national politics (the most common topic), economy, social issues, foreign affairs and other topics alike.

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 2022 until June:

Meta (60,75%), including funds from 3PFC program; International Center for Transitional Justice, ICTJ (16,43%); National Endowment for Democracy, NED (7,35%); Twitter (6,49%), Internews (6,41%), Centro Latinoamericano de Investigación Periodística, CLIP (2,25%) and Microsoft Store Support (0,32%). That’s about a total of 608,5 million COP, roughly 103.061 USD at the exchange rate on September 21, 2022 (see attached file).

According to the information provided by the applicant, Colombiacheck does not receive funding from the Colombian government or any state entity, or the government of any other country. The income sources of the organization are transparently disclosed at their 'About us' (Sobre nosotros) page. The applicant has presented a detailed breakdown of the funding sources, 60% of which rely on a contract with Meta.

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

According to the assesor's knowledge, the editorial output of Colombiacheck is in no way controlled by the state, a political party, politician or a pressure group. The relationship with its parent organization, Consejo de Redaccion, which gathers over 130 affiliate members in 21 departments of Colombia, ensures this plurality 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. Examples 1 and 2 check multiple claims with different rates from the speeches given by presidents Iván Duque and Gustavo Petro, political rivals, one on the last audience before Congress of his term and the other on his inauguration with some common affairs, such as energetic transition and peace process, from opposing points of view. Example 3 shows how four then presidential candidates of different parties, who were mayors of different cities, were equally evaluated on their boasting about the achievements of their past local administrations. Examples 4 and 5 are part of a series dedicated to heading aspirants to the Senate: one covers two claims of mutual accusations between former FARC leaders and Duque’s party (critic of the agreement signed with them) about alleged breaches, both sides having a point but omitting context; the other is about different rated checks to another contender about the work he did as former Technology Minister. Example 6 also rates differently a group of comparisons contained in a viral image on runoff presidential candidates as former mayors. Examples 7 and 8 show two false ratings to disinformation about a possible fraud that came from opposing sides of the spectrum. Finally, examples 9 and 10 show equally false ratings to the same apocryphal quote attributed to Petro and former president Álvaro Uribe, his biggest critic. All the fact-checks argue their ratings with the evidence found for each.

1. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/en-su-posesion-petro-dio-tres-datos-cuestionables-dos-verdaderos-pero-y-dos-verdaderos

2. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/discurso-final-de-duque-ante-el-congreso-tuvo-sobre-todo-datos-cuestionables-y-verdaderos

3. https://colombiacheck.com/especiales/chequeos-candidatos-exmandatarios/

4. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/julian-gallo-y-miguel-uribe-dan-dos-verdades-con-peros-sobre-la-entrega-de-bienes-de-las

5. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/david-luna-saca-pecho-por-sus-logros-en-mintic-y-mezcla-cifras-verdaderas-cuestionables-y

6. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/comparacion-entre-alcaldias-de-gustavo-petro-y-rodolfo-hernandez-mas-datos-cuestionables

7. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/es-falso-que-duque-no-quiso-atender-observadores-europeos-que-querian-hablar-de-fraude

8. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/fotos-del-registrador-vega-con-pepe-mujica-y-rafael-correa-no-fueron-en-el-foro-de-sao

9. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/de-nuevo-petro-no-trino-que-los-costenos-son-la-poblacion-menos-intelectual-del-pais-es-un

10. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/alvaro-uribe-tampoco-trino-que-los-costenos-son-la-poblacion-menos-intelectual-del-pais 

Colombiachek has adequately demonstrated its non-partisanship by providing, as requested, 10 examples of fact-checks to politicians, political parties and leaders of all the political spectrum in Colombia. When performing fact-checks, Colombiacheck applies a sound fact-checking methodology, backing the information with reliable sources and covering issues with equivalent standards, regardless the ideological alignment of the institution, political party or person concerned.

https://colombiacheck.com/metodologia  

As requested, Colombiacheck has a page where it discloses publicly its fact-checking methodology. The methodology, which principles and steps are clearly explained, is deemed sound and transparent.

After a random review of a number of fact-checks published over the previous year (Mar- Aug. 2022), no traces have been found of any commercial interest that might influence the fact-checking activity of Colombiacheck.

After a random review of a number of fact-checks published over the previous year (Mar- Aug. 2022), no traces have been found of unduly support by the applicant for any party, any politician or political candidate, nor any advocacy for or against any policy positions.

https://colombiacheck.com/sobre-nosotros  

Bound to a non-profit organization, Colombiacheck self-defines as a "journalistic project, independent of the commercial and political tensions inherent in private enterprise."

After a random review of a number of fact-checks published by Colombiacheck, the use of links to back fact-checks is deemed consistent and widespread. Thanks to the availability of these information resources, users can easily dig into the relevant information by themselves.

According to the assessor's knowledge, the sources used by Colombiacheck to back fact-checks are well diversified, relevant and sound. 

Colombiacheck does not show any unduly concentration in any specific sources. External sources, which are consistently referred, are the core of the background information. Relying on a wide array of sources, the applicant gives priority on its fact-checks for public, open-access content.

The sources mainly used by Colombiacheck are free-access and reliable, so that readers can conclude the interests that could influence the accuracy of the evidence provided. No examples have been found of cases where the applicant has contextualized the sources used to back its fact-checks, explaining why some sources have been used instead of others.

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 three working approaches: https://consejoderedaccion.org/sobre-cdr   

Founded as part of Consejo de Redacción (CdR), an independent association of journalists, Colombiacheck is a fact-checking project. This information is disclosed on the About Us (Sobre CdR) page of CdR website. 

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 Consejo de Redaccción, Colombiacheck openly discloses this relationship with its parent media house. This disclosure is located in the footer of the applicant website, as well as in the header of the parent organization's website.

https://colombiacheck.com/sobre-nosotros  

Colombiacheck discloses on its website the identities of its nine main staff members, with their biographies and professional background information not clearly displayed.

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

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

Colombiachek identifies its main staff members. The same applies to its parent organization, Consejo de Redacción. Reasonably detailed information is also provided in both cases. Nevertheless, their profiles does not include personal means of contact or social media handles. This would be advisable for the sake of 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 provides several means of contact on its About us page, which comprise a general email address (contacto@colombiacheck.com), an online contact form, social media handles and a WhatsApp number. On the About us page, the email address is provided only as plain text; that is, not as an active link. We kindly recommend the applicant to activate the email, so that the users can more easily contact the organization.

https://colombiacheck.com/metodologia  

Colombiacheck openly discloses its fact-checking methodology, which is deemed sound and reliable. 

Based on a random review of a number of fact-checks published over several months prior to this assessment, enough examples have been found that Colombiacheck selects claims to check based primarily on the reach and importance of the claims.

Drawing upon a number of randomly selected fact-checks, the assessor has come to the conclusion that Colombiacheckcommits 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.

No examples have been found of the objectionable situations indicated for this criterion. In absence of any apparent infringement of the Code of Principles, the assessment is deemed as compliant.

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. 

As requested, Colombiacheck has provided detailed information about how it encourages users to propose claims to check, provide data and knowledge, as well as warn about possible errors in their team’s checks, through email and social media profiles. 

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

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

We changed the term "aclaraciones" (clarifications) for "correcciones" (corrections) as suggested, but kept that next to "actualizaciones" (updates). The difference is explained in the text as translated below:

"After making sure that efecttivly there was a mistake and inaccurate data were published, they are going to be replaced and an explaination will be stated under the title 'Correction' or 'Rectification', depending on the case, with its publication date. If changing the checking rate were necessary as a result of this correction, the original one would also be kept settled.

When important information complementing, clarifying or updating data arrives to Colombiacheck's team once a check is published, we include it with an explaination about its relevance, under the title 'Updating' also with the date".

Colombiacheck has a sound corrections policy, although the terms used to label them ("aclaraciones y actualizaciones"; clarifications and updates, in English]) are somewhat vague. Instead of these two terms, a more transparent use of the term "correcciones"' (corrections) would be advisable.

Colombiacheck has a sound corrections policy. The applicant has adequately adopted the suggestion to label these corrections as "Correcciones y actualizaciones" (corrections and updates), instead of the originally used terms "aclaraciones y actualizaciones" (clarifications and updates) which were considered somewhat vague.

The corrections policy is explained in reasonable detail, so that readers can know in advance the how their claims will be handled and how much time migh take to get response. The applicant commits itself to responding the correction claims within 48 hours, which is deemed positive.

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 tweet we received from the user Thisquesuza (@anerdquista), who was fact-checked about an image that showed a note of 1985 newspaper about the arrest of the leftist politician and now president of Colombia, Gustavo Petro, with a false photography of him “disguised as a woman”: https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/este-pantallazo-de-supuesta-noticia-con-captura-de-petro-es-un-montaje 

The reclamation was made more than five months after the article's publication. It said: “JOURNALISTIC MEDIOCRITY @Colcheck says that this article is false, I invite @AlexCamposSando to retract publicly. With a simple search in the digital archive of El Tiempo, he could have corroborated”.

We had looked up the original report on the diary in a public library, but the image was taken from the edition published in another city. The latter was different from the one we found the first time and coincident with the viral tweet except for Petro's portrait, as we realized after a new check. So, we made a clarification on our first article and published a new one with the whole explanation of our mistake and the new rate: not false, but questionable. https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/actualizacion-el-tiempo-si-registro-la-captura-de-petro-en-1985-aunque-no-vestido-de-mujer

For the second instance, we present this fact-check on the repeatedly checked disinformation that attributes to FARC guerrilla an infamous bomb-necklace murder comitted by common criminals in 2000. Leyla Ponce de Leon (@leylaponcedleon) made us notice that the user who posted the checked tweet had rectified her mistake, so we clarified that in the article.

https://colombiacheck.com/chequeos/de-nuevo-el-collar-bomba-fue-autoria-de-delincuencia-comun-no-de-las-farc

Colombiacheck has presented evidence of several 'updates' within the period assessed. The first 'update' was published on December 16, 2021, and it was months later expanded with another 'update' in June 22, 2022. The third 'update' was published on that same date, June 22, 2022. Although all these are not exactly 'corrections', in absence of any additional evidence of misbehavior in this respect, the assessment for this criterion is deemed as compliant. Nevertheless, as indicated above, we encourage the applicant to be more transparent with their terminology and using the term "corrections".

https://colombiacheck.com/sobre-nosotros                            

As requested, Colombiacheck 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 linked to a parent organization, the association Consejo de Redaccion, which Vision and Mission adhere to a fair and open corrections policy.