Demagog.cz is legally registered as an association with the explicit purpose of fact-checking and related activities. Information about the association and its structure are listed on the website at: https://demagog.cz/stranka/o-nas .

Link to public register: https://or.justice.cz/ias/ui/rejstrik-firma.vysledky?subjektId=938169&typ=PLATNY

Demagog.cz is a stand-alone legal entity, provided link to national public register is sufficient.

1) Demagog.cz was publicly launched in February 2012 for the purpose of fact-checking public political debates. Back then, there was no media organization explicitly dedicated to fact-checking in the country and we (largely students from Brno, Czech Rep.) felt that there was need to publish independent fact-checks for debates during elections and even for those happening each week on TV.

For the past 11 years, our mission has remained the same: provide the public with unbiased information, point out falsehoods and misleading claims, and educate young people, not least our student interns, on how to find and use sources of data.

2) Who currently works at Demagog.cz:

5 editors

16 analysts, mostly interns

8 analysts-proofreaders

2 IT specialists

2 social media managers

1 PR specialist

1 coordinator

3) Besides fact-checking, we:

a) run workshops on fact-checking and media literacy,

b) promote fact-checking during various public gatherings,

c) maintain political promise trackers,

d) cooperate with Facebook to fact-check widely shared content,

e) work with AI developers to research and develop automated tools for fact-checkers.

f) coordinate regional cooperation with Demagog.sk and Demagog.org.pl.

4) In the next 12 months our plan is to fully launch regional-level coordination between Demagog.cz, Demagog.sk and Demagog.org.pl, incl. regular meetings, sharing expertise, sharing fact-checks and jointly adopting new technological tools for fact-checkers. We are also updating our visuals and expanding our communications team and activities. We will also be relaunching our promise tracker for the new Czech government.

As described by the Applicant, Demagog.cz was the first fact-checking-focused initiative/project in the Czech Republic, going all the way back to 2012.

I have had the opportunity to repeatedly assess the organization and the project and it is encouraging to see how the project has grown and professionalized itself over the years.

As the register excerpt (see attachment) states, the main objectives of the organization are:

• Checking factual claims made in policy debates (selection, processing and evaluation).
• Increasing public and media pressure on the quality of individual policy debates and on politicians themselves.
• Developing an active civil society, democracy and the rule of law.
• Promoting the principles of accountability.
• Education for media literacy.

While fact-checking is the primary objective of the organization, other activities such as media literacy workshops or keeping track of the government's promises seem to be a well-suited addition that enables the organization to further engage with their audience and widen its scope.

All our fact-checks are listed directly on our website: https://demagog.cz with some publications containing fact-checks of a number of claims made during the same speech, interview or debate.

To find past political fact-checks, you can switch pages at the bottom of the list. For lists of fact-checks of particular politicians, parties, topics etc., go to https://demagog.cz/vypis-recniku or https://demagog.cz/vyroky or use our API ( https://demagog.cz/stranka/api-pro-vyvojare ).

An Excel file with past fact-checked political statements is attached.

Besides fact-checking politicians, Demagog.cz works with Facebook to fact-check and label widely shared Facebook content: https://demagog.cz/spoluprace-s-facebookem

I always have to appreciate that the Applicant provides its data on fact-checked statements in an open format which points to a continuous management and updating of the fact-check database.

Provided data show that Demagog.cz fact-checked a total of 662 statements in 2022, which would be 12–13 fact-checked statements per week on average.

The distribution of fact-checks clearly shows that some weeks did not contain any fact-checked statements. However, this can be closely related to what political debates are on air in a given week and e.g. what is the current political environment (close to election/in the midst of a campaign etc.).

The weeeks where the Applicant has 'failed' to publish a fact-check primarily occur during the summer or before Christmas, with few exceptions in between. Considering the overall volume of fact-checked statements, I consider the level of activity of the organization as sufficient and compliant.

Using a sample of 200 fact-checked statements out of 622 total in 2022, I assigned each statements to one of pre-defined topical group (National economy, Domestic Politics, Foreign politics/relations, Energy, War in Ukraine, Covid-19, Regional politics, Other). The statistical distribution of topics shows that majority of statements are related to Domestic politics (36 %), National economy (18 %), Regional politics (12 %), Energy (10 %), Foreign politics/relations (9 %), all of which are closely related to the well-being and public interests of Czech society. A significant portion (10 %) of topics were classified as 'Other', however, these are often connected to verification of personal history statements of politicians running in an election as the Czech Republic had municipal election in September 2022 and an upocoming presidential election in January 2023, and numerous fact-checked debates were focused on the candidates themselves.

Furthermore, the Applicant's methodology highlight the importance of relevance of fact-checked claims and clearly states that 'we pay attention, as far as possible, to party leaders who discuss current political issues at the national forum. So we don't follow rank-and-file MPs that often, let alone local councillors, we don't select debates on issues that don't have political overlap or are not crucial at the time of fact-checking, and we focus on national media when selecting claims'.

We accept no funding or donations from political parties or politicians.

In 2021 Demagog.cz joined CEDMO, a national hub within the EDMO framework, a European Commission project intended to coordinate and support fact-checkers around Europe. As part of the project the Commission indirectly provides financial support for Demagog's fact-checking activities. In addition, the project is funded from the Czech National recovery plan.

https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/european-digital-media-observatory

https://fsv.cuni.cz/en/news/central-european-digital-media-observatory-cedmo-will-be-located-faculty-social-sciences

https://opp.cuni.cz/OPP-96.html (Czech, description of the recovery plan project)

As stated by the Applicant, the organization does not receive funding from political entities and no such funding has been identified. Such funding is prohibited by the organization altogether.

As the Applicant describes, however, it gains some fiancial support from national and international grants as it collaborates with other organizations in the academic/non-governmental sector. Such financial support is duly described by the Applicant on a dedicated webpage (https://demagog.cz/stranka/jak-je-projekt-demagogcz-financovan).

Our financing is described on our website: https://demagog.cz/stranka/jak-je-projekt-demagogcz-financovan.

The funding Demagog.cz receives from the European Commission through the CEDMO consortium is provided in accordance with our Code of Ethics ( https://demagog.cz/stranka/eticky-kodex-demagogcz ) and all fact-checks are conducted based on our standard methodology ( https://demagog.cz/stranka/jak-hodnotime-metodika ).

CEDMO itself functions independently, in a transparent manner ( https://cedmohub.eu/cs/o-nas/cedmo-zblizka/# ) and with no participation of European Commission personnel.

As described with respect to criterion 4.1, the Applicant provides ample details concerning its funding.

While some projects that the Applicant participates in are funded through international grant programmes, this is relatively standard in the non-profit sector and in my view should not be considered as breaching any of the criteria unless significant influence over operations is identified, which is not the case here.

The fact-checks listed below, most of which cover multiple statements, illustrate that whether we are checking statements made in an interview, in a tweet or a Facebook post, we apply the same basic approach:

1) Identify the various interpretations of the claim and their broader contexts.

2) Present data, ideally based on primary sources, and link to sources whenever they are available online. If sufficient data is not directly available nor obtainable upon request, the claim is uncheckable.

3) Determine whether there is a reasonable interpretation of the claim that is supported by available data. If not, the claim is false. If yes, the claim is true.

4) If the claim is true, determine whether, when put into context, the claim does not lead the listener/reader to a false conclusion. If it does, the claim is misleading.

https://demagog.cz/diskuze/stridani-prezidentu

https://demagog.cz/diskuze/prezidentske-finale-1f2d0fd5-2e23-491b-87e6-bc672e827ef8

https://demagog.cz/diskuze/zavolime-prezidentska-debata

https://demagog.cz/diskuze/statni-duchodovy-fond-v-cesku-nikdy-neexistoval-a-nebyl-tedy-vykraden

https://demagog.cz/diskuze/fotografie-z-roku-2017-vyuzita-proti-uprchlikum-z-ukrajiny

https://demagog.cz/diskuze/video-z-letecke-prehlidky-vydavano-za-zaber-z-ruske-invaze-na-ukrajinu

https://demagog.cz/diskuze/sona-pekova-a-americke-biologicke-laboratore-na-ukrajine

https://demagog.cz/diskuze/danuse-nerudova-kandidatka-na-prezidentku

https://demagog.cz/diskuze/andrej-babis-kandidat-na-prezidenta

https://demagog.cz/diskuze/petr-pavel-kandidat-na-prezidenta

The methodology of the Applicant has gradually improved and expanded over the years as has the collective experience of the team. The sourcing and logical reasoning behind both specific fact-checks and their broader context clearly displays the quality of the fact-checking.

The attached links feature claims by various politicians from across the Czech political scene. No apparent bias or different approach based on who made the claim was identified and the methodology laid out by the Applicant is identifiable within its fact-checks.

While we employ no strict formula to ensure balance, we make sure that politicians from all parliamentary parties are covered in our publications, with an increased focus on those in executive positions. During election time, we cover all parties or candidates with significant levels of support. Our primary focus is on interviews and debates or debate segments, from which we simply draw all factual statements and check those regardless of perceived importance.

https://demagog.cz/stranka/jak-hodnotime-metodika

Inspecting the data provided by the Applicant, the highest number of fact-checked statements are attributed to the Civic Democratic Party (ODS) which is currently in government and whose Chairman Petr Fiala is the Prime Minister, followed by the Pirate party (also in government), Freedom and Direct Democracy (second largest opposition party) and ANO2011 (largest opposition party in parliament). 12 more parties are also represented in the fact-checked statements in 2022, showing no clear bias towards one or another political entity.

The methodology of Demagog also clearly states how claims are selected, what factors are considered (balance, relevance, verifiability), what claims are NOT fact-checked at all, how are evaluations made, how is quality of fact-checks ensured and how should statistical data of specific politicians with respect to all their claims and their evaluations should be perceived and considered.

In short, this is still to date the most complete methodology I have had the opportunity to assess.

The Applicant's fact-checks almost without exception always delve into the broader context of the fact-checked claim and analyze it using available open-source information. No instance of a fact-check source with legitimate private interests was identified. The Applicant frequently contacts politicians or institutions with further requests for information and such action is duly described in the fact-check. Credible media outlets often serve as secondary sources for contextual information, however, emphasis on primary sources such as official documents, statistics, contracts etc. is evident.

The Applicant`s fact-checks do not display any apparent bias towards political entities other than that more attention is usually given to the statements of parties/politicians currently serving in governmental positions. Neither the organization nor its fact-checks display any advocacy for specific policy positions.

Our code of ethics includes non-partisanship as one of the primary principles. Both employees and volunteers are required to disclose membership in political parties or political youth organizations and are barred from working in Demagog.cz if they become members or become employed or volunteer for such an entity.

https://demagog.cz/stranka/eticky-kodex-demagogcz

As described by the Applicant, direct political activity of team members or presenting policy views by the Applicant is strictly prohibited.

The Code of Conduct could, in some form, touch upon the issue of social media activity of the organization's team members (or especially its main representatives), however, the specification of prohibition of presenting views in the name of the legal entity otself suggests that presenting personal views is allowed.

However, considering that the organization currently has over 30 team members, credible history and partnerships, and that no significantly politically engaged social media activity of its Coordinator or Chief Editory was identified, it is unlikely that such activity of an individual could be attributed to the organization as a whole. In that sense, the expansion of the Code of Conduct is only presented as a suggestion of the Assessor.

The Applicant has a very sound and time-tested sourcing, which has only been improving over the years. The usual number of sources and its contextualization within a fact-checks is very extensive and easy-to-follow for fact-check replication. I also appreciated the, in my opinion, improvement of the website and its layout as it now allows to browse through fact-checks from a specific debate within a single page without the need to go to a new page.

No instance of a source's personal security being compromised was identified.

The Applicant places special focus on primary sources within its methodology, and high usage of primary sources (government documents, statistics, contracts, but also ifnormation obtained thorugh direct contact) is easily identifiable across fact-checks.

The Applicant demonstrates high-quality of its fact-checking through often deconstructing series of events or other claims related to the fact-checked one. Numerous sources are always used and whenever sufficient evidence is not identified, the claim is marked as non-verifiable.

No specific istances where the reader could expect relevant interests of the sources used were identified.

Demagog.cz is an independent organization, legally a registered association.

Record in public register: https://or.justice.cz/ias/ui/rejstrik-firma.vysledky?subjektId=938169&typ=PLATNY

The Applicant has a dedicated web page focused on financing (https://demagog.cz/stranka/jak-je-projekt-demagogcz-financovan).

The page details all main sources of funding, with the main current sources being:

• A joint grant provided by Google
• A partner grant awarded to the CEDMO (Central European Digital media Observatory) project
• A fact-checing project conducted in co-operation with Prague Security Studies Institute, financed fromm the European Media and Information Fund
• Co-operation with Facebook (Meta Platforms Ireland Limited) on fact-checking platform content

The page also contains links to annual reports from 2016–2019. Annual reports gradually improve with respect to information completeness.

Demagog.cz also provides a link to its transparent account which lists all incoming and outgoing transactions, with a specification of a given transaction.

Financial information on our website: https://demagog.cz/stranka/jak-je-projekt-demagogcz-financovan

Our accounts are not audited, the accounting requirements for our association are limited, but financial transactions made in CZK and received by Demagog.cz are listed on our "transparent account" available to the public. Due to technical limitations of the account, transactions made in USD or EUR are not visible. We are considering potential solutions to this issue.

The Applicant, as stated before, is registered as its own legal non-profit entity, therefore the ownership obligation is not applicable in this context.

The Applicant details its funding on the provided webpage in a above-standard manner. Existence and link to its transparent bank account also allows for verification of major donations or outgoing transactions.

Section "Spolek Demagog.cz" at https://demagog.cz/stranka/o-nas

The specific team members and their roles are displayed on the web page, accompanied by a photo and a short bio. Professional social media links such as LinkedIn would be welcome but are not necessary.

Organizational structure is fairly simple with 1 Project Coordinator, 1 Chief Editor, 4 Editors, 4 Board Members and other specific non-executive roles (PR, web, social etc.) and is sufficiently described.

Section "Kdo připravuje Demagog.cz?" at: https://demagog.cz/stranka/o-nas

The professional bios of leading team members (Coordinator, Chief Editor, Editors, Board members) could ideally be somewhat expanded and standardized (some members state more specific information), however, I view the current state as compliant.

https://demagog.cz/stranka/kontakty

Users can also get in touch with us on Facebook via direct messages or comments: https://www.facebook.com/Demagog.CZ/

We encourage users to contact us when they find incorrect information in any of our fact-checks, if they are aware of additional data sources or if they simply have a suggestion on who and what to fact-check: https://demagog.cz/stranka/mam-vyhradu-k-hodnoceni-nebo-navrh-na-overeni-kam-se-mohu-obra

The Applicant properly lists numerous contact information and encourages its audience to reach out to Demagog.

Our methodology: https://demagog.cz/stranka/jak-hodnotime-metodika .

A specific of Demagog.cz is that we largely focus on debates, speeches or interviews and their segments and fact-check all factual statements made during their course. Over the past 11 years we have checked on average more than 90 claims each month (our current average is around 60) and many more during election campaigns. As a result, we have not found it practicable to contact the speakers in reference to each claim. Rather, we communicate with them and their offices when we are unable to find sufficient sourcing for an assessment of their claim.

The Applicant's methodology is extensive and clearly explains the entire fact-checking process and associated expectations or issues related to claim assessment.

The Applicant explains in detail how it selects claims to be fact-checked, and takes into balance, relevance and verifiability of claims. While it usually does not provide reasoning for choosing each specific claim (this mostly happens with on-line fact-checks), it expains how it selects specific debates that feature high-level politicians or cadidates who delve into topics relevant for the Czech public as a whole (i.e. as opposed to closely focusing on regional topics).

The Applicant repeatedly demonstrates commitment to proper contextualization, fact-checks can often be perceived as a short insight case study into the topic at hand. The volume of provided sources allows to gain a broader understanding of the claim and any potentially conflicting information are duly noted and contextualized.

No bias related to utilized sources or to handling and assessing evidence was identified.

The Applicant often contacts official institutions or the authors of claims for additional information, which is both stated in the methodology and identifiabe within fact-checks. As the Applicant notes on its website, this is logically not done with respect to each fact-check but only where sufficient evidence has not been identified.

We encourage visitors to make suggestions on who and what to fact-check on our website: https://demagog.cz/stranka/mam-vyhradu-k-hodnoceni-nebo-navrh-na-overeni-kam-se-mohu-obra . On the other hand, most suggestions come during times of heightened public interest based on our encouragement of users of social media (such as http://tiny.cc/wzi4vz ).

We used to host a web-based platform called "Ověř to", where fans could suggest claims to check and vote on which ones should be prioritized. The platform was discontinued after a few years due to low public interest and the fact that most of the claims submitted were not factual.

The Applicant clearly and repeatedly invites its audience to send in claims to fact-check as evidenced. The potential for a claim to be fact-checked is descirbed in the Applicant's methodology (https://demagog.cz/stranka/jak-hodnotime-metodika), where it clearly states that only factual claims are fact-checked and provides examples of what is or is not fact-checked.

Corrections page on our website: https://demagog.cz/stranka/mam-vyhradu-k-hodnoceni-nebo-navrh-na-overeni-kam-se-mohu-obra

Demagog.cz has an easily accessible and coherent corrections policy, as evidenced on its website.

The corrections policy of Demagog (see attachment for webiste translation) is clear and concise, clearly stating the following:

• how can the audience reach out to Demagog if they think they identified a mistake
• how is the correction request handled and passed on to editors
• all new information are sources are carefully verified
• based on the new analysis, a correction is either made or not made
• if the new information is deemed as relevant and the assessment is adjusted, this is notably marked next to the corresponding statement and published the same way as the original statement, icluding publishing on social media

The website also includes a list of all the corrections made, currently sitting at 37, which seems like an incredible number over 10 years of existence of the organization.

In my opinion, the corrections policy is also sufficiently tied to the website dedicated to methodology, as the corrections process follows the same principles as the original assessment.

Over the past 12 months we received no correction request which resulted in a change of rating. In 3 cases, we updated our assessment based on additional information provided after publication:

https://demagog.cz/vyrok/22358

https://demagog.cz/vyrok/22373

https://demagog.cz/vyrok/22271

Correction requests have, in the past few years, took the form of Facebook comments, sometimes by the speakers themselves arguing for the veracity of their claims, to which we respond using the same means while applying our standard corrections process.

The last correction request that led to a change of rating happened in 2021: https://demagog.cz/vyrok/20418

Corrections are clearly marked and the Applicant also provides a list of all corrections made over time (see attachment).

Section "IFCN" at https://demagog.cz/stranka/o-nas

Correctly stated on the Applicant's website. A short statement about the IFCN's mission, including its full name, would also be welcome.

Not Applicable

As stated before, Demagog.cz is a stand-alone legal entity.