![FactCheckHub [International Centre for Investigative Reporting]](https://mail.ifcncodeofprinciples.poynter.org/storage/logos/factcheckhub_logo.png?v=1616501477){kind=logo}
Organization: FactCheckHub
Applicant: International Centre for Investigative Reporting
Assessor: Ebele Oputa
Background
As described on its website, FactCheckHub is an initiative of a non-governmental organization - The International Centre for Investigative Journalism (ICIR). FactCheckHub was established in May 2020 in response to the Covid-19 pandemic but has a history of being involved in combating misinformation. Particularly in the months leading to the 2019 Nigerian general election, the Centre undertook a collaborative project which birthed the CrossCheck Nigeria.
Assessment Conclusion
FactCheckHub is not compliant and is required to provide the link to the corrections policy of ICIR and evidence of adherence to that policy.
Ebele Oputa assesses application as Compliant
A short summary in native publishing language
For a new initiative, FactCheckHub has an impressive array of activities it hopes to implement - from fact checking in multiple Nigerian languages to hosting webinars, creating a network of student fact-checkers, developing training courses, and managing a forum for constructive discussions. While the initiative is compliant on all grounds, I would still recommend the following edits:
4.1) On the funding section of the "About Us" page, there should be a link to the exact page on the parent organization's website detailing the sources and amount of funding, not the homepage. The funding details should also be well documented as we strive for utmost transparency as upholders of truth in the society.
4.3) While FAQs are a good way to present information, they might not be the best way to provide detailed information on organizational structure. Perhaps the information under the section titled "our process and structure" can be transferred to the "About Us" page and an abridged version provided in the FAQ with a link to the "About Us" page
6.1) I would suggest that corrections be placed at the top of the page, rather than the bottom as it would otherwise be missed, thereby defeating the purpose.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
FactCheckHub is an initiative of the International Centre for Investigative Reporting (The ICIR) aimed at combatting misinformation in the society. Established in May 2020 with headquarters in the Federal Capital Territory -Abuja, Nigeria’s capital, we are an independent, impartial fact-checking organisation from Africa.
Note/ Action taken: The link-back to the parent company and it's registration status have been effected in the about us [https://factcheckhub.com/about-us/] section.
ICIR CAC Certificate... (954 KB)
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
As described on its website, FactCheckHub is an initiative of a media organization - The ICIR. This information can be easily found on the "About Us" page, with a link to the parent organization. The certificate of incorporation of the parent organization is also attached to this application. Best practice would be to provide the parent company's registration number and a link to CAC but that is not mandatory for the purposes of this application.
done_all 1.1 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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?
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The FactCheckHub was established in May 2020 with the primary aim of combating misinformation, disinformation, hoaxes and rumours about topical issues including COVID-19, elections, health and governance, among others.
The FactCheckHub has 7 staff and 9 Volunteers. (See the list of our staff here: https://factcheckhub.com/our_team). Our volunteers primarily include language translators and narrators for Hausa, Igbo and Yoruba.
Aside from fact-checking, we amplify fact-check stories and literacy contents in shareable social media formats in Hausa, Igbo and Yoruba Languages.
We also host regular webinars to build the capacity of journalists and the public in combatting misinformation.
In the coming year, we intend to work with schools to introduce and create a network of student fact-checkers just like the campus journalists network as well as improve on our language amplifications by having stories published in multiple languages.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
FactCheckHub was established in May 2020 solely for the purpose of factchecking and promoting national discourse on the role of truth in society. The organization has 7 staff and 9 volunteers. The organization encourages the use of volunteer factcheckers to augment its work through a call for volunteers, although details of these volunteers are not included on its team page.
https://factcheckhub.com/about-us/
https://factcheckhub.com/our_team/
For a new organization, FactCheckHub has an impressive array of activities it hopes to implement - from factchecking in multiple Nigerian languages to hosting webinars, creating a network of student factcheckers, developing training courses and managing a forum for constructive discussions. This is very important as information disorder is a complex problem that requires a multipronged approach.
FactCheckHub's parent organization is not new to the information disorder ecosystem. In 2018, the Centre undertook a collaborative project which birthed CrossCheck Nigeria and from all indication, seemed to have used its learnings to establish a dedicated factchecking unit.
done_all 1.2 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
FactCheckHub operates in Nigeria, a country with only 3 verified signatories. As such, is required to have published an average of at least one fact check a week over the course of the six months prior to the date of application.
The spreadsheet provided by FactCheckHub was verified against its website. In the past months (August 2020-March 2021), a total of 92 factchecks were published. This translates to an average of 2 factchecks per week.
done_all 1.3 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
A review of fact checks published over the past three months shows the organization's devotion to claims that invariably affect the Nigerian public. While the fact checks broadly cover politics, health, and economy, specifically, they verify claims related to the efficacy of the covid-19 vaccine, insecurity in the country, and the statements of political elites on freedom of speech (Twitter ban), religious conflicts and public funds embezzlement amongst others.
On average, at least 75% of the applicant’s fact checks can be considered public interest stories.
done_all 1.4 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The FactCheckHub and its parent organisation, the International Centre for Investigative Reporting, have never had any commercial, financial or any other kind of relationship with any politician, political party or government in Nigeria.
As a matter of policy, the FactCheckHub and the ICIR do not receive any kind of support, funding or otherwise from any government, local or international. FactCheckHub is fully funded by the ICIR, which receives support from International donor foundations, including MacArthur Foundation, Ford Foundation, national Endowment for Democracy and Open Society foundation.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
FactCheckHub and its parent organization, ICIR do not seem to have any commercial, financial and/or institutional relationship to politicians or political parties in Nigeria or abroad.
The ICIR comprehensively lists out its independence and fundraising policies. According to them, "No ICIR employee or any member of its board of trustees may offer anybody, directly or indirectly, any money, gift, service or material with a view to influence anybody in taking a decision affecting the Centre...Specifically, no reporter may receive gifts at whatever time of the year in whatever guise from anybody or corporate entity, including companies and government or its agents about which he reports about."
"The ICIR is a nonprofit organization and will seek and receive funds from local and international donor agencies, civil society organizations and individuals. The centre will not, however, accept funding or other assistance from politically exposed persons, particularly those facing prosecution. The ICIR will also receive funding from some government agencies or departments for specific programs or activities such as training of journalists. Our accepting funding from any individual or organization will in no way tie our hands if we have to report on their activities. All contributors will have their names published on the Centre’s website except if otherwise instructed."
https://www.icirnigeria.org/about-us/
While ICIR does say that it "will also receive funding from some government...for training of journalists" and receives funding from a foreign politically linked organization (the US-based National Endowment for Democracy), we do not think this affects its factchecking operations and its policy confirms that.
done_all 1.5 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago)
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
According to the information on FactCheckHub and ICIR's website as well as industry knowledge of the assessor, this organization does not receive funding from local or foreign state political actors.
done_all 1.6 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The claims verified varies from entertainment to health misinformation and the coronavirus pandemic, to social issues.
Irrespective of where a claim emanates from or who the parties involved are, we verify the claims and label them accordingly using our already pre-defined ratings.
For instance, during the #EndSARS protest [a protest in Nigeria that seeks to end police brutality], we verified claims made by all the different parties involved.
Nigeria has two major political parties, thus we checked claims from the ruling party and the opposition party during elections. We have also verified claims made in Ghana, Kenya etc.
More so, we check claims made by other media organisations too.
1. https://factcheckhub.com/is-united-nations-creating-a-new-country-out-of-nigeria-cameroon/
5. https://factcheckhub.com/burna-boy-wizkid-not-the-first-nigerians-to-win-grammy/
6. https://factcheckhub.com/was-a-baby-born-holding-the-mothers-failed-iud/
7. https://factcheckhub.com/was-this-man-struck-roasted-by-thunderstorm-while-receiving-phone-call/
9. https://factcheckhub.com/can-a-woman-post-bail-in-nigeria/
10. https://factcheckhub.com/did-nigeria-discharge-over-11000-covid-19-patients-in-one-day/
11. HAUSA edition: https://factcheckhub.com/rubutun-dake-yawo-cewa-gwamnatin-tarayya-tana-temakawa-yan-najeriya-da-tallafi-ba-gaskiya-bane/
12. HAUSA edition: https://factcheckhub.com/cewar-shugaban-hukumar-lafiya-ta-duniya-who-ya-kamu-da-cutar-sarkewar-numfashi-ta-covid-19-karya-ne/
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
After assessing a total number of 20 fact checks, 10 of which were randomly selected, we can ascertain that FactCheckHub uses the same high standards of evidence, considers the reach and importance and comes to a conclusion based on the evidence presented. It is also noteworthy to state that the sampled fact checks were not concentrated on one particular political party and the use of subheadings as sections made it easy to read through.
Also, primary sources of information seem to be an editorial requirement as most of the fact checks reviewed contained quotes from health or legal practitioners as necessary. All fact checks related to the economy or data-heavy claims (i.e. on FDI) contained visual data. And there was no cause to question the absence (or presence) of bias.
done_all 2.1 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
This criteria is compliant because FactCheckHub provides an explanation, albeit sparsely, on its website about its selection/fact-checking process, and the evidence provided in this application as well as those independently gathered by the assessor shows that there is no undue concentration on one side. It is also clear that reach/importance are considerations for selection.
Nevertheless, FactCheckHub can do better by explaining what "significance" means to them (i.e. if there is a threshold), and in general, being more detailed about its selection process.
Recommendation: Please review Africa Check or Dubawa for better practices
done_all 2.2 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Based on the information provided and in view of what we have observed, FactCheckHub discloses relevant interest of sources. For every human source, there is an accompanying description of their role, organization and relevance to the claim.
done_all 2.3 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
There is no evidence of support for any political party, politician or political candidate, or advocacy group. FactCheckHub seems to be independent and "seeks claims from speeches by public figures in general, without biases or preferences for their ideological, political, sexual, racial, or religious affiliation."
done_all 2.4 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
FactCheckHub
15-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
On its website, FactCheckHub describes the guiding principles for the organization and how they ensure compliance.
"We are mindful of trending claims and those that have generated reactions, using our social media monitoring tools. Beyond these strategies, the FactCheckHub reaches out to different groups on social media to present suspected claims, misinformation and unverified information considered untrue or misleading."
However, there is no statement setting out the policy on non-partisanship for the staff, steps to ensure compliance or repercussions for non-compliance. The closest to this would be the below statement which I do not believe sufficiently addresses this criterion.
"As a matter of policy, we do not issue opinions because we neither defend any ideology, nor do we carry out political or any kind of activism or campaign. We only rate the claim and not the person who said it, as we don’t judge personal attitude."
cancel 2.5 marked as Request change by Ebele Oputa.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
29-Jul-2021 (2 years ago)
On its website, FactCheckHub describes the guiding principles for the organization and how they ensure compliance.
"...As a matter of policy, we do not issue opinions because we neither defend any ideology, nor do we carry out political or any kind of activism or campaign. We only rate the claim and not the person who said it, as we don’t judge personal attitude.
The objective is to presents the facts unaffected by agenda or biases as our staff set aside their opinions and uphold the principles of independence and fairness..."
There is also a statement setting out the policy on non-partisanship for the staff and repercussions for non-compliance.
"This policy applies to both full-time staffers, correspondents and interns.
Appropriate sanction(s) for defaulters will be applied by the Editor, the management and/or the board in line with the International Centre for Investigative Reporting’s (The ICIR) – the FactCheckHub’s parent organisation – ethical standard, as stated in its staff handbook."
done_all 2.5 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
By our observation, it is clear that the applicant identifies the source of all significant evidence used in their fact checks, providing relevant links where the source is available online and in most cases, includes snapshots as evidence, especially for data-heavy claims. As far as we know, there has been no fact check with an unnamed primary source of information.
done_all 3.1 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
done_all 3.2 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
FactCheckHub 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.
done_all 3.3 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
In view of what we have observed, FactCheckHub 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.
done_all 3.4 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
FactCheckHub is an arm of the International Centre for Investigative Reporting (The ICIR) aimed at combatting misinformation in society. The FactCheckHub is owned by The ICIR, a non-profit media organisation promoting accountability and transparency in governance in Africa.
https://factcheckhub.com/about-us/
The ICIR has always been interested in dispelling misinformation, particularly in the months leading to the 2019 general elections in Nigeria, the Centre undertook a collaborative project which birthed the CrossCheck Nigeria.
The CrossCheck was a collaborative verification project aimed at helping the public make sense of what and who to trust online, ahead of Nigeria’s 2019 general elections.
Since then, The ICIR has maintained a robust fact-checking operation. The misinformation epidemic that came with Coronavirus provided the impetus to start full-fledged fact-checking operations, with its own newsroom and dedicated staff.
FactCheckHub
15-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
The FactCheckHub is an fact-checking operation set-up by the International Centre for Investigative Reporting (The ICIR) aimed at combatting misinformation in society. The FactCheckHub is owned by The ICIR, a non-profit media organisation promoting accountability and transparency in governance in Africa.
https://factcheckhub.com/about-us/
The ICIR has always been interested in dispelling misinformation, particularly in the months leading to the 2019 general elections in Nigeria, the Centre undertook a collaborative project which birthed the CrossCheck Nigeria.
The CrossCheck was a collaborative verification project aimed at helping the public make sense of what and who to trust online, ahead of Nigeria’s 2019 general elections.
Since then, The ICIR has maintained a robust fact-checking operation. The misinformation epidemic that came with Coronavirus provided the impetus to start full-fledged fact-checking operations, with its own newsroom and dedicated staff.
Note: Legal status and link back updated.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Based on the information provided by FactCheckHub about its legal status, we can ascertain that it is a fact-checking unit of a media house (ICIR). However, details about the registration of its parent organization cannot be found on its website. This is public information that ideally should be stated.
Source of funding is not detailed on a dedicated page but rather, summarily stated in a manner that does not clearly define how the organization funds its activities.
"Our Partners/Funders
FactCheckHub does not accept donations from anonymous sources, political parties, elected government officials or candidates seeking public office, or any other source we would consider a conflict of interest.
As a matter of policy, we do not give donors or advertisers any influence over our reports or ratings, as our editorial independence and fairness is pertinent to the work we do. This is clearly stated in our Memorandum of Understandings (MoUs) with our partners/grantors.
Also, our team of dedicated journalists solely decide on claims to fact-check, as well as our ratings."
cancel 4.1 marked as Request change by Ebele Oputa.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
29-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
Based on the information provided by FactCheckHub about its legal status, we can ascertain that it is a fact-checking unit of a media house (ICIR). There's also a link to the parent organization.
"The FactCheckHub is owned by The ICIR, a non-profit organisation promoting accountability and transparency in governance in Africa.
The organisation and governance of The ICIR can be seen here.
The ICIR was registered in Nigeria in 2010. It’s registration number is RC 41451."
It is also stated that FactCheckHub is funded by the International Centre for Investigative Reporting (The ICIR).
done_all 4.1 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
ICIR CAC Certificate... (954 KB)
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
There is a statement on the website that shows it is a fact-checking unit of a media house (ICIR).
done_all 4.2 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
https://factcheckhub.com/about-us/
See the subheadings: "Our Partners/Funders" and "Our Ethical Policy for FactCheckHub Journalists"
https://factcheckhub.com/faqs-methodology/#1471069040102-10c5a0ab-2ece
FactCheckHub
15-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
Our process and Structure
https://factcheckhub.com/faqs-methodology/#1471069040102-10c5a0ab-2ece
Our Guiding principles
https://factcheckhub.com/faqs-methodology/#1471069197868-7842003a-e0c2
Our Funders
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
It is unclear as to whether the team represents the only organizational structure. There is no mention of a separate board or if it is a joint board from the parent company. The only other information in this regard is "Our editors and reporters are non-partisan and open-minded in their work."
Please refer to https://dubawa.org/about-us/governance-organisation/ as a guide.
cancel 4.3 marked as Request change by Ebele Oputa.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
29-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
Information about Factcheck Hub's organizational structure can be found under the section titled - Our Process and Structure.
"The head of the FactCheckHub is the Editor who is responsible for all the editorial contents. The editor also doubles as the Team lead who directs the overall project. The Editor reports to the Executive Director and the Management team of the International Centre for Investigative Reporting (The ICIR) – the parent organisation. The ICIR Board of Trustee also serves as the board for The FactCheckHub.
The Deputy Editor provides editorial support required for the platform.
The Researchers and Fact-checkers research, verify claims, write reports following the laid down rules and guidelines."
done_all 4.3 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The professional biographies of those who play a significant part in editorial output are listed on this page: https://factcheckhub.com/our_team/
done_all 4.4 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
It's easy for people to contact FactCheckHub, from its home page to many other pages on the website. There's also a Whatsapp chat button that is displayed on every page.
done_all 4.5 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
FactCheckHub
15-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
https://factcheckhub.com/faqs-methodology/
https://factcheckhub.com/fact-guage-meter-ratings/
The misleading verdict updated.
The FactCheckHub has not started fact-checking in other languages [except for the the three reports in Hausa language which were pilot] relevant information will be translated when starting fact-checking in a language.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The method for the selection of claims can be found on FactCheckHub's website.
https://factcheckhub.com/faqs-methodology/#1471069040084-8d396222-72d6
https://factcheckhub.com/faqs-methodology/#1471069040102-10c5a0ab-2ece
The process of conducting research and sourcing for evidence is also detailed. Although, this information is provided under the section "Our on-the-record sourcing" which is a confusing title.
https://factcheckhub.com/faqs-methodology/#1471069174211-af55e13d-0172
On writing fact checks, FactCheckHub adopts a rating pattern called FACT GAUGE METER RATING. All the fact checks on the website include a rating from this system and seem to be consistent except for one. According to this applicant, "misleading is used in connection with media elements like photographs, infographs, videos etc. Here the media elements are real and not manipulated but they are placed in a wrong context or accompanied with a false explanation." By this definition, media elements refer to audio or visual claims.
However, there are some claims on its website which were not in audio or visual form that were given the misleading rating. This is inconsistent. It is either the misleading definition is broadened to include written claims, another rating is introduced or those affected fact-checks are reevaluated and given a rating that better reflects this rating system. Some of these fact checks are included for reference:
In addition, for an organization that conducts fact checking in multiple languages, it is advisable that all information about its establishment, process, and any such information that lends credence to its independence be published in the applicable language(s).
Furthermore, the various ways fact checks are published should be included somewhere on this page, especially since this organization claims to disseminate information in various forms.
cancel 5.1 marked as Request change by Ebele Oputa.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
29-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
The method for the selection of claims can be found on FactCheckHub's website.
https://factcheckhub.com/faqs-methodology/#1471069040084-8d396222-72d6
https://factcheckhub.com/faqs-methodology/#1471069040102-10c5a0ab-2ece
The process of conducting research and sourcing for evidence is also detailed.
https://factcheckhub.com/faqs-methodology/#1471069174211-af55e13d-0172
On writing fact checks, FactCheckHub adopts a rating pattern called FACT GAUGE METER RATING. All the fact checks on the website include a rating from this system and seem to be consistent. Nevertheless, it will be advisable for FactCheckHub to revisit this system periodically to reflect the nuances of language and the variations of truth.
done_all 5.1 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
In view of what we have observed, FactCheckHub selects claims to check based primarily on the reach and importance of the claims, and sometimes explains the reason for choosing the claim to check. All the claims sampled include a sentence at the beginning of the fact check about the source of the claim, the person making the claim, the platform of dissemination and the reach of the claim.
done_all 5.2 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
In view of what we have observed, FactCheckHub sets out in its fact checks relevant evidence that appears to support the claim as well as relevant evidence that appears to undermine it.
done_all 5.3 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
In view of what we have observed, FactCheckHub assesses the merits of the evidence found using the same high standards applied to evidence on equivalent claims, regardless of who made the claim.
done_all 5.4 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
In view of what we have observed, FactCheckHub seeks where possible to contact those who made the claim.
done_all 5.5 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
We encourage users to send claims for verification via our social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and WhatsApp (+2349030785265), including via email (info@factcheckhub.com).
Aside from that, we also encourage readers to submit claims for verification directly via the website: https://factcheckhub.com/submit-a-claim/ and through our forum/community board via: https://factcheckhub.com/forum/
Similarly, we make a call-to-action regularly via our social media platform such as this: https://twitter.com/thefactcheckhub/status/1294248020897300487 and this: https://twitter.com/thefactcheckhub/status/1295246732503252993
FactCheckHub
15-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
We encourage users to send claims for verification via our social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and WhatsApp (+2349030785265), including via email (info@factcheckhub.com).
Aside from that, we also encourage readers to submit claims for verification directly via the website: https://factcheckhub.com/submit-a-claim/ and through our forum/community board via: https://factcheckhub.com/forum/
Similarly, we make a call-to-action regularly via our social media platform such as this: https://twitter.com/thefactcheckhub/status/1294248020897300487 and this: https://twitter.com/thefactcheckhub/status/1295246732503252993
Note: The link back to what can or cannot be fact-checked has been updated on the "submit-a-claim" page/form.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
FactCheckHub encourages users to send claims for verification via their social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and WhatsApp (+2349030785265), including via email (info@factcheckhub.com).
Aside from that, they also encourage readers to submit claims for verification directly via the website: https://factcheckhub.com/submit-a-claim/ and through their forum/community board via: https://factcheckhub.com/forum/
Similarly, they make a call-to-action regularly via our social media platform such as this: https://twitter.com/thefactcheckhub/status/1294248020897300487 and this: https://twitter.com/thefactcheckhub/status/1295246732503252993
However, it does not clearly tell its users what cannot be fact checked. The closest to meeting this criterion would be the statement: "we often fact-check statements submitted by the readers, after selecting the most significant ones among them."
cancel 5.6 marked as Request change by Ebele Oputa.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
29-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
FactCheckHub encourages users to send claims for verification via their social media platforms such as Twitter, Facebook and WhatsApp (+2349030785265), including via email (info@factcheckhub.com).
Aside from that, they also encourage readers to submit claims for verification directly via the website: https://factcheckhub.com/submit-a-claim/ and through their forum/community board via: https://factcheckhub.com/forum/
Similarly, they make a call-to-action regularly via our social media platform such as this: https://twitter.com/thefactcheckhub/status/1294248020897300487 and this: https://twitter.com/thefactcheckhub/status/1295246732503252993
done_all 5.6 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
FactCheckHub
15-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
https://factcheckhub.com/request-a-correction/
https://factcheckhub.com/faqs-methodology/#1471069197834-950469cd-f60c
Updated to reflect that some complaint may not justify a response.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
https://factcheckhub.com/request-a-correction/
And on another page:
https://factcheckhub.com/faqs-methodology/#1471069197834-950469cd-f60c
This would ordinarily be compliant. However, I would suggest that corrections be placed at the top of the page, rather than the bottom as it would otherwise be missed, thereby defeating the purpose. Also, the policy can include that all corrections will be made as posts on the social media channels of FactCheckHub so that the new information tries to reach as many people as the old/incorrect information
cancel 6.1 marked as Request change by Ebele Oputa.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
29-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
https://factcheckhub.com/request-a-correction/
And on another page:
https://factcheckhub.com/faqs-methodology/#1471069197834-950469cd-f60c
"Our correction process is transparent. First, we acknowledge and send a feedback. The verification date, sources contacted and appropriate hyperlink to authenticate the new information provided is included in the edited report. It is effected and labelled as “Correction”.
The correction will be amplified via our social media channels."
done_all 6.1 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
Criteria 6.2
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the corrections policy to verify it meets critera. No additional information needed.
FactCheckHub
15-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The corrections policy clearly states the process for handling corrections.
"Our correction process is transparent. First, we acknowledge and send a feedback. The verification date, sources contacted and appropriate hyperlink to authenticate the new information provided is included in the edited report. It is effected and labelled as either an “Update” or “Correction”."
FactCheckHub also states that it covers all kinds of complaints.
"So, if you notice any error in our reports, do not hesitate to contact us."
However, it does not explain that some complaints may justify no response.
cancel 6.2 marked as Request change by Ebele Oputa.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
29-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
The corrections policy clearly states the process for handling corrections.
"Our correction process is transparent. First, we acknowledge and send a feedback. The verification date, sources contacted and appropriate hyperlink to authenticate the new information provided is included in the edited report. It is effected and labelled as either an “Update” or “Correction”."
FactCheckHub also states that it covers all kinds of complaints and states that some compliants do not justifya response.
"So, if you notice any error in our reports, do not hesitate to contact us."
"However, some complaints may not justify a response."
done_all 6.2 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
However, we have updated stories to reflect new information or steps taken. For instance, in this report, https://factcheckhub.com/was-a-baby-born-holding-the-mothers-failed-iud/ we updated it to show that the Kenyan media house whose report we fact-checked has effected the correction.
Note/Action taken: The report has been updated.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
According to FactCheckHub, a correction has not been requested.
However, the applicant has a practice of updating stories to reflect new information or steps taken. For instance this report - https://factcheckhub.com/was-a-baby-born-holding-the-mothers-failed-iud/ and this one - https://factcheckhub.com/claim-that-nigerias-okonjo-iweala-has-been-appointed-wto-director-general-is-false/
Nevertheless, I do advise that updates be made at the top of the page as it is difficult to notice, especially when the title remains unchanged. Factchecking organizations should always consider the psychology of their audience when making editorial decisions.
done_all 6.3 marked as Compliant by Ebele Oputa.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
We are not an existing signatory.
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.
FactCheckHub
23-Mar-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
FactCheckHub
15-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
It is an operation set-up by The ICIR and not a unit, hence all the correction policy is domiciled on the FactCheckHub website.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
10-Jun-2021 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
In this case, we would require the link to the corrections policy of ICIR and evidence of adherence to that policy.
cancel 6.5 marked as Request change by Ebele Oputa.
Ebele Oputa Assessor
29-Jul-2021 (2 years ago) Updated: 2 years ago
As a requirement of signatory status, the parent media company must show that it has and adheres to an open and honest corrections policy. Here's evidence of that policy as provided by FactCheckHub: https://www.icirnigeria.org/about-us/