Organization: Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
Applicant: Holger Roonemaa
Assessor: Signe Ivask
Background
The overall evaluation shows that Delfi/EPL fact checkers are thorough in their work and explain their policy and work process. I can see that they are transparent and systematic in their approach.
Three things that can be bettered: Explain why some sources of the claim are interviewed and some are not (the audience can understand it implicitly [you cannot contact Kreml spokesperson]. Still, I'd recommend being explicit in explaining why you ask someone why they claim such a thing, others are not). Second, describe more of what you did in the article when correcting something. You state that something has changed, and in some stories, you provide more information. Be consistent. Thirdly, if you can make EPL/Delfi principles more easy to follow or grasp, it would be perfect (but I understand why you might not be able to do it).
However, these things are just minor issues. You are compliant in these regards; I am just offering some feedback on improving things.
Assessment Conclusion
The overall evaluation shows that Delfi/EPL fact checkers are thorough in their work and explain their policy and work process. I can see that they are transparent and systematic in their approach.
Three things that can be bettered: Explain why some sources of the claim are interviewed and some are not (the audience can understand it implicitly [you cannot contact Kreml spokesperson]. Still, I'd recommend being explicit in explaining why you ask someone why they claim such a thing, others are not). Second, describe more of what you did in the article when correcting something. You state that something has changed, and in some stories, you provide more information. Be consistent. Thirdly, if you can make EPL/Delfi principles more easy to follow or grasp, it would be perfect (but I understand why you might not be able to do it).
However, these things are just minor issues. You are compliant in these regards; I am just offering some feedback on improving things.
Signe Ivask assesses application as Compliant
A short summary in native publishing language
Analüüs näitab, et olete oma töös hoolikad, läbipaistvad ning süsteemsed. Mõned soovitused on teile siin-seal siiski anda, ent pigem on need nn iluvead või pisikesed tähelepanekud. Ühe asjana toon veel välja, et kui suurem osa tekste on ladusas eesti keeles, siis siin-seal esineb siiski kirja- või lohakusvigu. Toon selle välja, sest olete toonud keelekasutuse olulisena välja.
Muidu on tegu väga põhjaliku analüüsiga. Aitäh!
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago)
We explain on this link https://epl.delfi.ee/artikkel/91897223/meie-pohimotted that Eesti Päevalehe Faktikontroll is operated by the investigative and fact-checking desk of Delfi Meedia. The investigative team is completely independent at its work.
We explain here (https://epl.delfi.ee/artikkel/91899111/kontaktid-ja-vaidlustused) that Delfi Meedia is part of a publicly listed media group Ekspress Grupp. We link to publicly available financial statements that are published every quarter and say that Delfi Meedia receives a vast majority of its revenue from a) selling digital and print subscriptions to readers, b) selling ads.
Bios of our team members are also published on the above link.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant explains it thoroughly.
done_all 1.1 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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?
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago)
1. Eesti Päevaleht’s Faktikontroll was started in October 2017 with the aim to factcheck statements made by candidates of the upcoming elections. The Faktikontroll unit remained active after the elections and has continued to mainly factcheck claims made by politicians. In April 2020 we added a new dimension to the factchecking section and started actively factchecking claims made about public health issues such as COVID.
2. The investigative and fact-checking team consists of eight people. Out of the eight people three are designated fact-checkers. Two people conduct fact-checks in Estonian and one in Russian languages and media space. Two factcheckers are also running a biweekly disinformation podcast. Factcheckers’ work is supported by the head of the team, investigative reporters and a data reporter.
Additional five people are contributing on honorariums through the Estonian Debating Society (non-profit) that we partner with.
Please note that while any original reporting in Delfi Meedia’s publications is published behind a paywall, our policy is that fact-checks are 100% free and accessible for everyone.
3. Delfi Meedia is a media house that publishes the online news site Delfi.ee, daily Eesti Päevaleht, weeklies Eesti Ekspress and Maaleht and several magazines. These publications are news-driven and serve to inform the Estonian society. Ekspress Meedia is a company focusing 100% on journalism. The fact-checking team is operating as part of a separate cross-publication investigative and fact-checking team.
4. Over the last years we have dealt a lot with topics relating to public health crisis. After Russia started the war in Ukraine, we witnessed a lot of disinformation around Russian, Ukrainian, security issues. This has became the main line of work for us last year. In spring 2023 we were able to expand our core fact-checking team to three people. This has really amplified our work and impact. In spring 2023 we became part of BECID (Baltic Engagement Center for Disinformation Disorders; becid.eu). BECID is a pan-Baltic network of experts working to combat information disorders and promote media literacy in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. It brings together universities and fact-checkers. BECID is linked to the European Digital Media Observatory (EDMO).
This allows us a more methodical approach into fact-checking as well as constant information exchange across the Baltic countries’ fact-checking community. We intend to focus on that partnership this year and more importantly to take maximum use of the expanded team when tackling disinformation
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago)
1. When and why was your fact-checking operation started? Answered.
2. How many people work or volunteer in the organization and what are their roles? Answered.
3. What different activities does your organization carry out? Answered.
4. What are the goals of your fact-checking operation over the coming year? Answered.
done_all 1.2 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
All fact-checks can be found here. https://epl.delfi.ee/kategooria/91764779/faktikontrollid
Below is a list as well:
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant explains what is requested thoroughly.
done_all 1.3 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
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.
Content analysis of the data shows that more than 75% of applicant's fact checks focus on the well-being of individuals, fighting popular disinformation/misinformation. Also, topics that polarise the society, one of which is e-voting. They keep an eye on what politicians are doing and claiming, as people with remarkable following, I think keeping an eye on their doings is very important. They have kept an eye on different political parties, from the last three months I do not see a bias towards anyone.
done_all 1.4 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
We don't have any financial obligations to the state, political parties or individuals.
The BECID project is co-funded by the European Commission Digital Europe Programme (like all EDMOs), but all partners maintain a total editorial independence.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant explains what is requested thoroughly.
done_all 1.5 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
We don't receive any such funding as indicated in the criteria. The BECID project is co-funded by the European Commission Digital Europe Programme (like all EDMOs), but all partners maintain a total editorial independence.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant explains what is requested thoroughly.
done_all 1.6 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
These factchecks show that we check a wide variety of claims and pay a special attention to claims that carry a high risk to public health issues, to disinformation about the war and Ukrainian refugees but also to political affairs and political decisions that affect regular people (such as tax changes).
Besides factchecking claims made by public figures in the traditional media, we are paying special attention to what is being circulated on social media because claims made on social media often have an extra high virality rate. To indicate the virality level, we also report on the reach of such posts where possible.
When conducting factchecks we look first for scientific and firsthand evidence. Our preference is always to find scientific proof to the claims or to debunk the claim. We also use official and trusted documents, reports and data, be it national or international. We give links to used evidence, making our factchecks easy to reconstruct. Besides scientific articles, reports and official data, we look for expert comments to use as evidence. On some occasions we support the evidence list with references to fact checks made on the same topic by international well-recognized factchecking organizations.
Instead of plainly debunking a claim we always attempt to analyse the genesis of the claim. It means analysing from which moment a specific and originally potentially true claim developed into a misleading or a false claim. This is especially important when factchecking viral posts on social media.
Due to their different nature, the process to fact check "regular" claims by politicians is slightly different. When factchecking social media posts on public health issues, we often need to check several claims in one post. In case of politicians' statements, as a general rule we will fact check one specific claim. But the burden of proof is still the same.
Our factchecks go through an editing process which ensures that the texts are in high professional standard. The editing process guarantees that no single fact check is dependant on one person's personal belief or misjudgment. Our conclusions are always based on the evidence that we gather during the factchecking process.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
"2.1 The applicant fact-checks using the same high standards of evidence and judgement for equivalent claims regardless of who made the claim"
The fact checks follow high standards of evidence. They are well systemised and organised. The analysis shows that the topics vary from anonymous accounts posting edited photos of tax rises to medical claims about vaccination. The research used to back up the claims is of good quality and chosen well. The analysis of the fact checking team here also shows the systematic approach to fact checking as such.
done_all 2.1 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant explains what is requested thoroughly.
done_all 2.2 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
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.
Going over the texts shows that in some cases fact checkers have given more context but done it very respectfully (e.g., Radio that focuses on alternative views [Nõmme raadio], which in some cases match Kreml views; the owner has a political background, etc.).
done_all 2.3 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
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.
From the fact checks, it does not come forth that the unit is biased towards anyone or has avoided covering someone. It seems they choose claims that have gathered a lot of attention.
done_all 2.4 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant explains what is requested thoroughly.
done_all 2.5 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
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.
I looked at FAKTIKONTROLL | Sotsiaalmeedias levib kontekstita „Reporteris“ näidatud võltsuudis, mis pidi sarnaste eest hoopis hoiatama, FAKTIKONTROLL | Kas 2019. aastast alates on alkoholisurmade arv kasvanud kolmandiku võrra?, FAKTIKONTROLL | Vana video Iisraeli sõjalennuki transportimisest ei ole seotud käimasoleva Iisraeli-Hamasi sõjaga, FAKTIKONTROLL | Kas Martin Helmel on õigus, et viimase kolme aasta jooksul on Eestis eelarvekulud kasvanud rekordtempos?, FAKTIKONTROLL | Kas vastab tõele, et Eesti kulutab sotsiaalkaitsele vaid poole EL-i keskmisest, nagu väidab Monika Haukanõmm?, FAKTIKONTROLL | Lottemaa teemapargi tegelasi ei ole kujutatud surnuna - levival väitel puudub kontekst.
All of the above had evidence brought out in the text (even links, so that people can check it themselves). All the fact checks follow a system explaining where the claim came from and why it is checked. All of the claims in the text are supported with evidence. The fact checks end with an evaluation.
done_all 3.1 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
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.
Fact checks in the randomised sample show systemic approach of explaining what data is being used and why. All the evidence is explained and framed for the reader.
done_all 3.2 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
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.
There is a multiple-angle approach in the applicant's fact checks. For example, when talking about Kas Martin Helmel on õigus, et viimase kolme aasta jooksul on Eestis eelarvekulud kasvanud rekordtempos?, FAKTIKONTROLL | Kas vastab tõele, et Eesti kulutab sotsiaalkaitsele vaid poole EL-i keskmisest, nagu väidab Monika Haukanõmm? or even story about alcohol deaths in Estonia, the evidence used and provided is compelling. The author uses different angles (although the same data set) and makes their point.
done_all 3.3 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
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.
As stated before, the fact checks of Delfi's team are very transparent (in evidence and why it was chosen to be checked). The source usage makes sense and is also explained. And even if some source is added, its been stated by the team.
done_all 3.4 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
We are a fact-checking unit of a media house (AS Delfi Meedia). As explained earlier, we are working at the investigative and fact-checking desk. Proof can be found at contact's page
https://delfimeedia.ee/kontakt/toimetus/#uuriv
(Uuriv toimetus).
The bios of our teammembers are listed on Faktikontroll's site at https://epl.delfi .ee/faktikontrollid/kontaktid-ja-vaidlustused.
The team operates and delivers fact-checks separately from the news and opinion desks and other editorials.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant explains what is requested thoroughly.
done_all 4.1 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
https://epl.delfi.ee/faktikontroll-faktikontrollid/kontaktid-ja-vaidlustused
In Estonian language: “Delfi Meedia on osa börsiettevõttest AS Ekspress Grupp. Delfi Meedia peamised tuluallikad on ajakirjanduslike väljaannete tellimuste- ja reklaamimüük.”
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant explains what is requested.
done_all 4.2 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant explains what is requested thoroughly.
done_all 4.3 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant explains what is requested thoroughly.
done_all 4.4 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
https://epl.delfi.ee/faktikontroll-faktikontrollid/kontaktid-ja-vaidlustused
We also have a special feedback box under every fact-check where we encourage people to send feedback and suggestions. Example can be seen here: https://epl.delfi.ee/artikkel/120228017/faktikontroll-ei-depo-kaupluse-tootajatel-pole-keelatud-vene-keeles-raakida
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant explains what is requested thoroughly. These feedback boxes and encouragement to contact the fact checkers are present.
done_all 4.5 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant explains what is requested thoroughly. Applicant explains very thoroughly how they do the fact check.
done_all 5.1 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
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.
As stated by the fact checking unit before as well, they explain why they have chosen a claim to check in every story that was in the sample. They also state where the claim gathered a lot of attention – what platform – and how much attention.
done_all 5.2 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
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.
Yes, the applicant's stories reflect also data that conflicts; however, they also explain why it is that way. They do not take a stance and remain rather neutral in the stories.
done_all 5.3 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
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.
I argue that the applicant indeed follows this expectation to their work.
done_all 5.4 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
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.
In some cases, they have not added to the claim why the person shared the story or made it (e.g., https://epl.delfi.ee/artikkel/120192264/faktikontroll-andmed-ei-naita-radioaktiivsuse-kasvu-vaited-tuumapommi-kohta-ukrainas-on-valed). In some cases, they have given the source the floor to speak and explain themselves. Usually, it is explained in the texts. Because the fact checkers have explained their motives and work process very precisely and mostly give comment space to whoever is the author of the claim, I will mark this compliant.
done_all 5.5 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
By today, Eesti Päevalehe Faktikontroll has become a well-known (and still the only Estonian) fact-checking entity. It means that people are regularly sending in hints and suggestions. In some instances we ask publicly for our readers to send suggestions or personal experience to be able to track how a specific disinfo narrative has been spreading.
We explain our feedback and corrections policy on the "Contacts and Corrections" section of the site. https://epl.delfi.ee/artikkel/91899111/kontaktid-ja-vaidlustused
We ask people to send in their ideas and correction applications by email.
We also have an automatic feedback form under every fact-check that we publish.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant explains what is requested thoroughly.
done_all 5.6 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant has followed through on what was asked of them. It is explained well.
done_all 6.1 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
Criteria 6.2
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the corrections policy to verify it meets critera. No additional information needed.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
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. -> Yes, its been stated repeatedly.
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. -> Yes, it has been explained.
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. -> Yes, it has been explained and marked.
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. ->Yes, they have stated this and provided a link to send the complaint to IFCN.
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. -> The Fact-checking unit has repeatedly explained how they correct the mistakes. They have been very clear about it.
done_all 6.2 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
According to our policy, we add a title comment "Corrected" under the headline. This makes the correction visible to people who see the headlines but don't click on the story itself. In addition we add a visible paragraph with the date of the correction and explanation right under the lede in the article.
Example 1:
We fact-checked a claim that the finance minister will have a personal right to change the car tax rate to “whatever percentage” in the future. We initially labeled the fact-check as ‘false’ but later amended it to ‘misleading’. The minister (ministry) will be able to change the rate annually but they can only do so inside the scale that the parliament will have written into the law.
Example 2:
We fact-checked a claim about alleged e-voting fraud at the parliamentary elections. After publishing, we amended the fact-check with additional proof. It didn’t lead to a change in the verdict.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
There are indeed claims at the story's beginning explaining that they have edited the article. The one recommendation is to explain a little further what was added to the article (example 2), as it remained unclear for the reader. If I had read this story before and opened now it once again, I'd be happy to see what you added, so I do not have to go through the article in-depth once again (which I wouldnt, if I weren't invested in the story).
done_all 6.3 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
The applicant has followed through on what was asked of them. It is explained well.
done_all 6.4 marked as Compliant by Signe Ivask.
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.
Eesti Päevaleht / Ekspress Meedia
11-Sep-2023 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
https://delfimeedia.ee/uldtingimused/
In Estonian: 9.1. Delfi Meedia lähtub artiklites esinevate vigade parandamisel Eesti Meediaettevõtete Liidu hea tava leppest.
Signe Ivask Assessor
15-Oct-2023 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
EPL/Delfi does have such a page and the paragraph as well. However, these principles are difficult to find on the EPL/Delfi page. The principle of company's honest and open correction policy is "hidden" in a quite formal text. Nevertheless, the requested things are covered, just not very easy to find and follow, therefore, the evaluation is compliant.