Organization: CORRECTIV
Applicant: David Schraven
Assessor: Christoph Schurian
Background
Correctiv is an independent, non-profit media house. Since it was founded in 2014, CORRECTIV has made its name with extensive investigative research and reports, such as the CumEx tax scandal. The independent fact-check editorial CORRECTIV.Faktencheck they try to "fight against false information".
Assessment Conclusion
The applicant fully meets the criteria of the IFCN CoP. The "Faktencheck" is fair and profound, transparent and methodical, based on the high editorial standards of CORRECTIV.ORG. They do this important work since years, absolut no reason to reject the application.
Christoph Schurian assesses application as Compliant
A short summary in native publishing language
CORRECTIV.Faktencheck liefert Faktenchecks zu relevanten Themen. Mit durchschnittlich 40 Checks im Monat wrden tagtäglich Überprüfungen von Behauptungen vorgelegt, die vor allem in online Medien und Social Media häufig geteilt und zitiert werden. In Zeiten der Pandemie liegt der Schwerpunkt seit 2020 natürlich auf Meldungen zu Covid19, vor allem werden Berichte und Aussagen untersucht, die unter Querdenkern und Impfgegnern kursieren. Die Faktenchecker:innen von Correctiv halten sich dabei an die transparenten und strengen journalistischen Standards, zu der sich auch die Mutterredaktion bekennt. Wie in vielen anderen Medien ist die Dominanz von Covid-Themen verständlich, aber auch etwas ermüdend (z.B, sich zum xten Mal daran abzuarbeiten, warum Covid19 nicht mit einer Influenza zu vergleichen ist).
Section 1: Eligibility to be a signatory
To be eligible to be a signatory, applicants must meet these six criteria
- 1.1 The applicant is a legally registered organization, or a distinct team or unit within a legally registered organization, and details of this are easily found on its website.
- 1.2 The team, unit or organization is set up exclusively for the purpose of fact-checking.
- 1.3 The applicant has published an average of at least one fact check a week over the course of the six months prior to the date of application. For applicants from countries with at least 5 or more verified signatories need to have at least a fact check a week over the twelve months of publishing track. Consult to factchecknet@poynter.org for confirmation.
- 1.4 On average, at least 75% of the applicant’s fact checks focus on claims related to issues that, in the view of the IFCN, relate to or could have an impact on the welfare or well-being of individuals, the general public or society.
- 1.5 The applicant’s editorial output is not, in the view of the IFCN, controlled by the state, a political party or politician.
- 1.6 If the organization receives funding from local or foreign state or political sources, it provides a statement on its site setting out to the satisfaction of the IFCN, how it ensures its funders do not influence the findings of its reports.
Criteria 1.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please explain where on your website you set out information about your organization’s legal status and how this complies with criteria. Attach a link to the relevant page of your website.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
CORRECTIV.Faktencheck is a unit within CORRECTIV, dealing exclusively with publishing fact checks and reports about misinformation, disinformation and digital policy. This is also expressed in the layout of our website.
Find all about our registration here: https://correctiv.org/kontakt/impressum/
We are registered as a non profit organization with the commercial register of the town of Essen in Germany. Our registration # is HRB 25135
Our factchecking newsroom is a distinct fact-checking project of organization.
Please find attached our registration.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
All informations provided.
done_all 1.1 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 1.2
Proof you meet criteria
Please answer the following questions – (see notes in Guidelines for Application on how to answer)
1. When and why was your fact-checking operation started?
2. How many people work or volunteer in the organization and what are their roles?
3. What different activities does your organization carry out?
4. What are the goals of your fact-checking operation over the coming year?
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The fact checking section was first set up in May 2017 ahead of the German general elections. Currently, there are seven members in the fact checking team. We publish fact checks, articles about the background of disinformation campaigns, networks of people spreading misinformation or about policy initiatives trying to combat disinformation.
Last year, we published a detailed article arguing for the importance of fact checking and accurate information for democracy: https://correctiv.org/top-stories/2020/07/09/warum-demokratie-faktenchecks-braucht/
Over the coming year we will continue our daily work, especially focusing on the German elections. Our team will grow as we will expand to video fact checks and embark on a joint project with two universities.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago)
"Over the coming year we will continue our daily work, especially focusing on the German elections." Due to delay in assessing this phrase was written for 2021. Now is 2022, are there any news for the IFCN?
done_all 1.2 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 1.3
Proof you meet criteria
- The applicant has published an average of at least one fact check a week over the course of the six months prior to the date of application.
- For applicants from countries with at least 5 or more verified signatories need to have at least a fact check a week over the twelve months of publishing track.
- Consult to factchecknet@poynter.org for confirmation.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago)
We publish about forty fact checks a month and have done so for several years. In the past six month we published about 200 fact checks.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago)
The team of CORRECTIV.Faktchecking is still very busy, they publish new checks practically every day.
done_all 1.3 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 1.4
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will assess compliance through a review of the fact checks published over the previous three months. No additional information required.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago)
After assessing the fact-checking stories of "CORRECTIV.Faktencheck" the last few months I can confirm they are in line with IFCN's expectations. More than three quarters are published in “public interest” issues that “relate to or could have an impact on the well-being of individuals, the general public or society”. In pandemic times not surprising that there is a dominance in issues of health. Often they investigate into allegations of so called "Querdenker und Impfgegner" and alternative media stories.
done_all 1.4 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 1.5
Proof you meet criteria
Please explain any commercial, financial and/or institutional relationship your organization has to the state, politicians or political parties in the country or countries you cover. Also explain funding or support received from foreign as well as local state or political actors over the previous financial year.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
We have no financial relationship to parties. CORRECTIV has received some funding from a government agency, the Bundeszentrale für Politische Bildung, this was for projects related to media literacy. CORRECTIV.Faktencheck won a grand from the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF – Ministry of Education) for a project working on an algorithm to help fact checking – this is a joint project with the Technological University of Dortmund and the Ruhr-University Bochum.
None of this funding has any bearing on the content we fact check.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago)
done_all 1.5 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 1.6
Proof you meet criteria
If you confirmed the organization receives funding from local or foreign state or political sources, provide a link to where on your website you set out how you ensure the editorial independence of your work.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
We have a statute which our employees are bound to. This is to ensure our independence. https://correctiv.org/redaktionsstatut/
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago)
The "Redaktionsstatut" is very clear, no anonymous donations, every donation more than 1000 Euro is to disclose, donors have no influence on editors.
done_all 1.6 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Section 2: A commitment to Non-partisanship and Fairness
To be compliant on nonpartisanship and fairness, applicants must meet these five criteria
- 2.1 The applicant fact-checks using the same high standards of evidence and judgement for equivalent claims regardless of who made the claim.
- 2.2 The applicant does not unduly concentrate its fact-checking on any one side, considers the reach and importance of claims it selects to check and publishes a short statement on its website to set out how it selects claims to check.
- 2.3 The applicant discloses in its fact checks relevant interests of the sources it quotes where the reader might reasonably conclude those interests could influence the accuracy of the evidence provided. It also discloses in its fact checks any commercial or other such relationships it has that a member of the public might reasonably conclude could influence the findings of the fact check.
- 2.4 The applicant is not as an organization affiliated with nor declares or shows support for any party, any politician or political candidate, nor does it advocate for or against any policy positions on any issues save for transparency and accuracy in public debate.
- 2.5 The applicant sets out its policy on non-partisanship for staff on its site. Save for the issues of accuracy and transparency, the applicant’s staff do not get involved in advocacy or publicise their views on policy issues the organization might fact check in such a way as might lead a reasonable member of the public to see the organization’s work as biased.
Criteria 2.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please share links to 10 fact checks published over the past year that you believe demonstrate your non-partisanship.
Please briefly explain how the fact checks selected show that (I) you use the same high standards of evidence for equivalent claims, (II) follow the same essential process for every fact check and (III) let the evidence dictate your conclusions.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Our organization checks more claims that come from the right than from the left. When collecting relevant links for this question I found that in many cases the fact checks in which our verdict was some degree of "correct" were the ones that showed our non-partisanship best. This is because these checks investigated claims that either came from sources which have spread mis- or disinformation in the past or because our readers found them questionable.
For example:
This check showed that yes, a photo allegedly showing a Russian train without people wearing face masks was genuine (this was shared in the context of ridiculing German anti-Corona-measures, including the duty to wear face masks in public spaces).
These fact checks show that we publish checks that open up the possibility of criticism of politicians and government agencies – again, the mask-topic came up.
We also published checks in which we verified claims related to the environment and perhaps the hypocrisy of climate protecting technology.
And we publish facts that show mistakes or confusing practice of the public broadcasters (the most mainstream media which is attacked by many on the right).
Finally, one major topic of disinformation are vaccines. However, in one issue we found a mistake in the argumentation of those trying to defend vaccines.
And we publish many fact checks at the moment, which prove wrong claims about the Green Party. However, we also publish checks which prove right claims, like this statement:
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago)
Nothing to complain, all checks are "handwerklich sauber", that means, that they work to high journalistic standards. Correctiv.Faktchecker are explaining why they are mostly checking claims which came up as the political right. While we are in the third year of pandemic most claims came up by "Querdenker", science scepticists and conspiracy theorists
done_all 2.1 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 2.2
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to a place on your website where you explain how you select claims to check, explaining how you ensure you do not unduly concentrate your fact-checking on any one side, and how you consider the reach and importance of the claims you select to check.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2018/10/04/haeufig-gestellte-fragen/
See the question: Wie wählt ihr die Themen aus, die ihr überprüft?
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago)
The answer within a FAQ is very understandable, pick issues because of relevance and circulation and off course potential damage of desinformation
done_all 2.2 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 2.3
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will assess compliance through a review of the fact checks published over the previous year. No additional information required.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago)
As said in their "Redaktionsstatut", CORRECTIV and CORRECTIV.Faktencheck and all team-mates are very attentive to questions of compliance
done_all 2.3 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 2.4
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will assess compliance through a review of the fact checks published over the previous year. No additional information required.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
CORRECTIV.Faktenscheck as well as CORRECTIV commit to unbiased, non-political work. There is an ethics committee to ensure this aim. C. is a strong advocate for press freedom, human rights, and transparency in the governmental as well as business sector. C. signed the open letter of IFCN which explained the role of Youtube as a essential source for false informations, desinformation worldwide.
done_all 2.4 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 2.5
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to a place on your website where you publish a statement setting out your policy on non-partisanship for staff and how it ensures the organization meets this criteria.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago)
See also 1.5.
done_all 2.5 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Section 3: A commitment to Standards and Transparency of Sources
To be compliant on sources, applicants must meet these four criteria
- 3.1 The applicant identifies the source of all significant evidence used in their fact checks, providing relevant links where the source is available online, in such a way that users can replicate their work if they wish. In cases where identifying the source would compromise the source’s personal security, the applicant provides as much detail as compatible with the source’s safety.
- 3.2 The applicant uses the best available primary, not secondary, sources of evidence wherever suitable primary sources are available. Where suitable primary sources are not available, the applicant explains the use of a secondary source.
- 3.3 The applicant checks all key elements of claims against more than one named source of evidence save where the one source is the only source relevant on the topic.
- 3.4 The applicant identifies in its fact checks the relevant interests of the sources it uses where the reader might reasonably conclude those interests could influence the accuracy of the evidence provided.
Criteria 3.1
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the applicant’s use of sources in a randomised sample of its fact checks to assess compliance. No additional evidence is required.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago)
All reviewed fact checks are exemplary in the usage of sources, a lot of links, a lot of different sources.
done_all 3.1 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 3.2
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the applicant’s use of sources in a randomised sample of its fact checks to assess compliance. No additional evidence is required.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago)
Also very exemplary, CORRECTIV.Faktencheck identifies potential interests of sources they uses
done_all 3.2 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 3.3
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the applicant’s use of sources in a randomised sample of its fact checks to assess compliance. No additional evidence is required.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago)
See 3.2
done_all 3.3 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 3.4
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the applicant’s use of sources in a randomised sample of its fact checks to assess compliance. No additional evidence is required.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago)
See 3.4
done_all 3.4 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Section 4: A commitment to Transparency of Funding & Organization
To be compliant on funding and organization, applicants must meet these five criteria
- 4.1 Applicants that are independent organizations have a page on their website detailing each source of funding accounting for 5% or more of total revenue for its previous financial year. This page also sets out the legal form in which the organization is registered (e.g. as a non-profit, as a company etc).
- 4.2 Applicants that are the fact-checking section or unit of a media house or other parent organization make a statement on ownership.
- 4.3 A statement on the applicant’s website sets out the applicant’s organizational structure and makes clear how and by whom editorial control is exercised.
- 4.4 A page on the applicant’s website details the professional biography of all those who, according to the organizational structure and play a significant part in its editorial output.
- 4.5 The applicant provides easy means on its website and/or via social media for users to communicate with the editorial team.
Criteria 4.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please confirm whether you are an ‘independent organization’
or ‘the fact-checking section or unit of a media house or other parent organization’ and share proof of this organizational status.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The organizational structure as well as our finances are explained here: https://correctiv.org/ueber-uns/
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
The applicant is an independent unit of the project Correctiv
done_all 4.1 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 4.2
Proof you meet criteria
If your organization is an “independent organization”, please share a link to the page on your website where you detail your funding and indicate the legal form in which the organization is registered (e.g. as a non-profit, as a company etc).
If your organization is “the fact-checking section or unit of a media house or other parent organization”, please share a link to the statement on your website about your ownership.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The finances of CORRECTIV are listed here: https://correctiv.org/ueber-uns/finanzen/
CORRECTIV.Faktencheck also receives money from Facebook, which we have mentioned in our FAQs, for example: https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2018/10/04/haeufig-gestellte-fragen/
Facebook doesn't interfere in our work. We choose freely which topics we fact-check and publish. We explain our cooperation here: https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2018/12/17/ueber-die-kooperation-zwischen-correctiv-faktencheck-und-facebook
Correctiv as a whole receives donations and funding from several foundations. Important supporters are the Rudolf Augstein Foundation, Schöpflin Foundation, Adessium Foundation, Luminate and Open Society Foundation. We also received funding from the Google Digital News Initiative and Mercator Stiftung.
From this money only a small fraction is dedicated to the CORRECTIV Fact Checking - as from the Open Society Foundation or the Google news Initiative.
We also get small donations from individuals who want to support CORRECTIV. These are sums between 3 and 100 Euros / month. But we don't report on the sum that is dedicated to CORRECTIV as a whole organization and the sum, that is dedicated to the factchecking.
See our latest transparency report here: https://correctiv.org/ueber-uns/transparenzbericht/ It also includes the memberships of the journalists working for the fact-checking team (e.g. in organizations, sports clubs...)
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
The applicant clearly states that it is part of Correctiv. Finances of CORRECTIV are listed on the website
done_all 4.2 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 4.3
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to where on your website you set out your organizational structure, making clear how and by whom editorial control is exercised.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Information about our structure, the members of our board of trustees and our ethics council can be found here: https://correctiv.org/ueber-uns/
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
The link shows bhow tranparency is an crucial essential for CORRECTIV.
done_all 4.3 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 4.4
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to where on your website you set out the professional biographies of those who play a significant part in your organization’s editorial output.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
We list the members of our team here:
https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2019/05/20/unser-team/
Each fact check includes the name of its author, with a klick on the name you get to their biography and contact details. See for example here: https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2021/05/26/foto-von-journalistin-in-schutzkleidung-wird-ohne-kontext-verbreitet-um-medien-panikmache-vorzuwerfen/
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
Corrective provides profiles about its members.
done_all 4.4 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 4.5
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to where on your website you encourage users to communicate with your editorial team.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Our main page includes all contact details at the bottom, as well as a link to register for our bi-weekly newsletter. https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/
We encourage our readers to send us mails, write to us on WhatsApp or send us links to check via our own Crowd Newsroom (see „Mitmachen“ element).
We also published an article when we opened a line in WhatsApp: https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2020/05/12/correctiv-faktencheck-ist-auf-whatsapp-erreichbar/
Our Twitter-Account includes a contact number for WhatsApp https://twitter.com/correctiv_fakt, our Instagram account is open for DMs https://www.instagram.com/correctiv_faktencheck/
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
Both CORRECTIV and CORRECTIV.Faktencheck provide a lots of opportunities to communicate with the editorial and fact-checking teamand their head.
done_all 4.5 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Section 5: A commitment to Standards and Transparency of Methodology
To be compliant on methodology, applicants must meet these six criteria
- 5.1 The applicant publishes on its website a statement about the methodology it uses to select, research, write and publish its fact checks.
- 5.2 The applicant selects claims to check based primarily on the reach and importance of the claims, and where possible explains the reason for choosing the claim to check.
- 5.3 The applicant sets out in its fact checks relevant evidence that appears to support the claim as well as relevant evidence that appears to undermine it.
- 5.4 The applicant in its fact checks assesses the merits of the evidence found using the same high standards applied to evidence on equivalent claims, regardless of who made the claim.
- 5.5 The applicant seeks where possible to contact those who made the claim to seek supporting evidence, noting that (I) this is often not possible with online claims, (II) if the person who makes the claim fails to reply in a timely way this should not impede the fact check, (III) if a speaker adds caveats to the claim, the fact-checker should be free to continue with checking the original claim, (IV) fact-checkers may not wish to contact the person who made the claim for safety or other legitimate reasons.
- 5.6 The applicant encourages users to send in claims to check, while making it clear what readers can legitimately expect will be fact-checked and what isn’t fact-checkable.
Criteria 5.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please provide a link to the statement on your website that explains the methodology you use to select, research, write and publish your fact checks.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2018/10/04/unsere-standards
https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2018/10/04/correctiv-faktencheck
https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2018/10/04/unsere-bewertungsskala
https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2018/10/04/haeufig-gestellte-fragen
Explanation about satire: https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2019/07/03/unsere-satire-richtlinie-was-wir-als-satire-bewerten-und-was-als-falschmeldung
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
CORRRECTIV.Faktencheck provides explanations to their methodology f.e. the rating, the veracity and so on.
done_all 5.1 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 5.2
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the methodology used in a randomised sample of your fact checks to assess compliance with these criteria. No additional evidence is required.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
See 2.2, FAQ of CORRECTIV.Faktencheck. The applicant selects claims to check first hand side on the reach and importance. Factchecks often starts with details about the high number the claim was shared online.
done_all 5.2 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 5.3
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the methodology used in a randomised sample of your fact checks to assess compliance with these criteria. No additional evidence is required.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
The fact checks deal with claims that are commonly made. They consult different sources. As they often address Covid19 as an issue, it often involves science skeptics and outsider opinions.
done_all 5.3 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 5.4
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the methodology used in a randomised sample of your fact checks to assess compliance with these criteria. No additional evidence is required.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
The methodolgy seems to be strict and transparent in every case.
done_all 5.4 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 5.5
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the methodology used in a randomised sample of your fact checks to assess compliance with these criteria. No additional evidence is required.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
Most fact-checks are concerned with posts on social media channels. To contact the author or originator of the post is not part of the workflow of CORRECTIV.Faktencheck. The aim is to examine the vericity of the allegations and narratives which are mostly already very popular in the internet.
done_all 5.5 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 5.6
Proof you meet criteria
Please describe how you encourage users to send in claims to check, while making it clear what readers can legitimately expect will be fact-checked and what isn’t fact-checkable. Include links where appropriate. If you do not allow this, explain why.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
We have many ways readers an send us links to check:
WhatsApp – we have one person handling the submissions but we will enroll in a partnership with whatsApp soon and get help with a tool to manage submissions and automate responses with our fact checks.
We have an automated email response if someone emails us directly to our common mailbox. This response includes the note that we will look into any link sent to us. (See attached)
We also developed our own crowd sourcing tool called Crowd Newsroom. This is another way, we encourage readers to submit questionable links or posts to us.
In every Newsletter we send to our readers we mention the Crowd Newsroom and our WhatsApp number. (See attached)
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
Applicant provides a lot of – also safe and anonymous – possibilities to contact the team.
done_all 5.6 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Section 6: A commitment to an Open & Honest Corrections Policy
To be compliant on corrections policy, applicants must meet these five criteria
- 6.1 The applicant has a corrections or complaints policy that is easily visible and accessible on the organization’s website or frequently referenced in broadcasts.
- 6.2 The policy sets out clear definitions of what it does and does not cover, how major mistakes, especially those requiring revised conclusions of a fact check, are handled, and the fact that some complaints may justify no response. This policy is adhered to scrupulously.
- 6.3 Where credible evidence is provided that the applicant has made a mistake worthy of correction, the applicant makes a correction openly and transparently, seeking as far as possible to ensure that users of the original see the correction and the corrected version.
- 6.4 The applicant, if an existing signatory, should either on its corrections/complaints page or on the page where it declares itself an IFCN signatory inform users that if they believe the signatory is violating the IFCN Code, they may inform the IFCN, with a link to the IFCN site.
- 6.5 If the applicant is the fact-checking unit of a media company, it is a requirement of signatory status that the parent media company has and adheres to an open and honest corrections policy.
Criteria 6.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please provide a link to where you publish on your website your corrections or complaints policy. If you are primarily a broadcaster, please provide evidence you frequently reference your corrections policy in broadcasts.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
See the question: Was ist, wenn ich einen Fehler bei euch entdeckt habe? https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2018/10/04/haeufig-gestellte-fragen/
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
In its FAQ they declares, that they will correct any mistake and provides any reader to submit any errors.
done_all 6.1 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 6.2
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the corrections policy to verify it meets critera. No additional information needed.
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
As stated in the "Faktencheck"-FAQ the applicant established "correction rules": encourage people to email errors, if there is an error admit and correct it immediately, publicly announce the correction or the change of assessment of the fact check.
done_all 6.2 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 6.3
Proof you meet criteria
Please provide a short statement about how the policy was adhered to over the previous year (or six months if this is the first application) including evidence of two examples of the responses provided by the applicant to a correction request over the previous year. Where no correction request has been made in the previous year, you must state this in your application, which will be publicly available in the assessment if your application is successful.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The biggest correction we had to publish last year was in this check:
A smaller one was this one: https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2020/11/19/covid-19-nein-die-infektionssterblichkeitsrate-in-deutschland-liegt-nicht-bei-0014-prozent
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
q.e.d; see 6.2
done_all 6.3 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 6.4
Proof you meet criteria
If you are an existing signatory, please provide a link to show where on your site you inform users that if they believe you are violating the IFCN Code, they may inform the IFCN of this, with a link to the complaints page on the IFCN site.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
"Unsere Standards" (see answer applicant) provides detailed informations about the IFCN and a link to contact IFCN.
done_all 6.4 marked as Compliant by Christoph Schurian.
Criteria 6.5
Proof you meet criteria
If you are the fact-checking unit of a media company, please provide a link to the parent media company’s honest and open corrections policy and provide evidence that it adheres to this.
CORRECTIV
27-May-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Christoph Schurian Assessor
14-Jan-2022 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
The applicant is part of CORRECTIV.ORG, the high editorial standards are the same for every unit of the project.