Organization: Faktisk.no
Applicant: Olav Østrem
Assessor: Ester Appelgren
Background
This is an assessment for renewal of Norwegian fact-checker Faktisk.no. Since the previous assessment, Faktisk.no has expanded their organization and purpose. They are now for example in a separate project focused on working with Norwegian schools.
Assessment Conclusion
My main assessment is that Faktisk.no is compliant.
I have one design issue that I would like to point out, even though it is not part of the IFCN criteria. Therefore, I do not wish for this to be changed. Because of a design choice made by Faktisk, I got confused while doing the assessment. At the top of each fact-check the audience will find the claim that is going to be fact-checked followed by a summary of the conclusion. After the summary, the "verdict" is presented in color (green, yellow and red), followed by the longer article where the fact-check is presented. The placement of the verdict is actually a bit confusing. It can be mistaken to be saying something about the summary of the conclusion rather than the claim. For example if a claim was false, the audience member could mistakenly think that the conclusion summary is false, just because of the placement of the verdict. I do not know why I have not reacted to this when I previously assessed Faktisk, but this time I had to think twice many times because of the placement of the verdict.
Ester Appelgren assesses application as Compliant
A short summary in native publishing language
.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
https://w2.brreg.no/enhet/sok/detalj.jsp?orgnr=919036508 (Norwegian company registration authority) This is an application for renewal. There is no change in our purpose or organization. Here is the link to the relevant page of our website: https://www.faktisk.no/om-oss
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Faktisk is a registered organization. It is owned by a number of large Norwegian media companies (including a PSB) that have vouched for supporting the organization.
done_all 1.1 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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?
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
1. Non profit Faktisk.no was launched July 5th 2017 as Norways first independent fact-checking organization to counter the spread of misinformation and disinformation in the public discourse.
2. currently 12 people work for Faktisk.no. There is one editor-in-chief, six fact checkers, two video reporters, one developer and three teachers.
3. We fact check the public discourse on all platforms. We also have a school program for fact-checking, source criticism and information literacy for children and young adults. And we teach fact checking and investigative journalism to journalists, students e.t.c. This project is named "Tenk." (Think), and is a separate department within our organization, and not part of the editorial team. ( www.tenk.faktisk.no )
4. To do more of the above.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The history of Faktisk is accounted for on their website. The staff has bios and the different activities are described in the about section on the website. The main purpose is fact-checking.
done_all 1.2 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
All of our fact checks, fact stories e.t.c are published at www.faktisk.no
We also post videos and simple debunks directly on facebook as posts: www.facebook.com/faktisk/ and on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQz_Ho0jf2x0CCHbVWRfySw/videos and on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/faktisk.no/
We also have a regular segment called on the morning show NRK P1+ radio channel (for a senior audience) https://radio.nrk.no/sok?q=faktisk.no
We also publish updated and case based learning resources in fact checking for teachers and schools at https://tenk.faktisk.no/ (the site for our school-project Tenk (Think))
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
During the past six months, on the website, at least three stories are published weekly. Of these stories, one is usually labeled as a fact-check, the others as articles or news items.
done_all 1.3 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
I have found that all fact-checks are in the public interest. Topics are mostly about health issues (Corona related) and Norwegian politics. Occasionally other topics occur.
done_all 1.4 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
Faktisk.no is a non partisan and independent non profit media company. We have not received any funding and support from foreign or local state or political actors over the previous financial year. However, we are owned by six of Norways largest media companies, where the state owned public broadcaster NRK is one of them.
Our school project "Tenk", which is a different department within our organization, received this autumn a government grant over this years revised education budget. Also, our School project "Tenk" won a tender competition for making four educational explainers for school-children about deep fakes and fake news, issued by the Norwegian Media Authority. Tenk is however a separate part of Faktisk, not involved in the editorial fact-checking work. Their finances are also separate at large.
Regardless of this, all grant providers, donors and owners must abide our organization being independent, transparent and non-profit. We do not accept external guidelines or requirements for how our school project (or the rest of the organization) prioritizes or performs its work. Tenk follows the same strict ethical code of conduct as the rest of the organization.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
IFCN is an independent organization. However, it is partly owned by a PSB and thus have a relationship with the state. In the Nordic media system, PSB's are traditionally very strong, but they are not controlled by the state.
done_all 1.5 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
We have a comprehensive page about us and our organization: https://www.faktisk.no/om-oss
This page provides full information about: Our owners, the editorial staff, the school project Think, our board of directors, our advisory council, our finance committee, our articles of association, a translation of the Fact-checkers code of principles, our internal ethics rules for Faktisk.no e.t.c.
This page begins by explaining our commitment to free and independent journalism, and how we are bound to follow the ethical code of practice for the Norwegian press, the Norwegian editors code of conduct, the IFCN code of principles and our affiliations.
Also, we have a page explaining our finances in detail - at least quarterly updated: https://www.faktisk.no/om-oss/finansiering
Here, we also publish our detailed yearly accounting e.t.c.
We are in the process of building a new website for our school project Tenk (currently running on google sites www.tenk.faktisk.no), which has just been a pilot for the last year. Tenk will follow the same transparency as Faktisk on the new site. We hope to have the first draft up and running in October/November.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Ownership and external funding is described in the about section on the webpage. I believe that the importance of that the organisation is independent is secured not only by the standards set up by the staff, but by an advisory board that seems to be consulted when needed.
done_all 1.6 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
https://www.faktisk.no/faktasjekker/z0y/nei-40-prosent-blir-ikke-avvist-i-psykisk-helsevern
https://www.faktisk.no/faktasjekker/Z0q/nei-koronadodstallene-er-ikke-kunstig-blast-opp
The selection above is the ten last fact-checks published - as is. They show in our opinion our diverse and impartial fact-checking, based on current affairs, virality and the criterias and methodology described.
We also publish a large number of so called fact-stories, providing in depth or background on topics regarding current misinformation and disinformation. These does not conclude like a standard fact-check - however they follow the same strict rules regarding high standards, impartiality and non bias.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
From the reviewed fact-checks I have come to the conclusion that the applicant always use a similar method in terms of sources. They contact a person that has made a claim, and include their response in the fact-check. They use official sources, most oftenly national statistics as sources and they explain clearly whenever they do an interpretation of their own of statistical material. They interview experts or government officials, politicians and different types of administrative experts as sources. Links are provided to online source material.
done_all 2.1 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
Our menu option "Methodology" brings you to our detailed methodology-section: https://www.faktisk.no/metode
Also, since we are part of the 3PFC-partnership with Facebook, we have a thorough description of how this works as well: https://www.faktisk.no/om-oss/facebook
Also, we have also hyperlinked our rating in every fact-check to the explanation of the rating scale on our Methodology page. https://www.faktisk.no/metode#skala
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
I have not found that the applicant are focused on one side. The methodology of Faktisk is clearly described and easy to understand. The selection of claims are described.
done_all 2.2 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Actually, this criteria is not really followed by Faktisk.no. However, in the examples that I have reviewed, I did not find it relevant to explain the interest of the sources. What is the interest of a quoted researcher? That is kind of beside the point if the source is doing an expert evaluation. In most cases it is also common knowledge to know something about the source's interest, such as the opposition trying to critizise the current government. Because of this, I think Faktisk is compliant.
done_all 2.3 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Yes, Faktisk is an independent organization.
done_all 2.4 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
We are completely open about key actors, boards, current and former staff e.t.c here: https://www.faktisk.no/om-oss
Our staff: https://www.faktisk.no/om-oss#redaksjonen
Our board: https://www.faktisk.no/om-oss#styret
Our advisory board: https://www.faktisk.no/om-oss#faktiskradet
In this section, we also give an in depth insight to our our company structure, economics, board of directors, e.t.c.
See also answer 1.6.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
There is no clear place on the website with a statement, rather bits and pieces of such a statement is found in many places on the website. The applicant is transparent on it's methods and staff bios are provided. Because they have translated the criteria for IFCN compliance as part of their about section, I believe they are compliant.
done_all 2.5 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Yes, sources are linked to when possible. They use official data, they contact government officials and other administrative staff. They contact individuals behind a claim. All is accounted for in the fact-checks in a transparent manner.
done_all 3.1 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The only time I have come across secondary sources in the Faktisk.no fact-checks are when they refer to other international fact-checkers to show that the claim has been reviewed before by others.
done_all 3.2 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
I have found that usually, several sources are used. There are times when only one source is used and then the source have been official data provided by Norwegian authorities.
done_all 3.3 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
As previously stated, interest of the sources are not explicitly described. However, my assessment is that Faktisk still is compliant as it would not be relevant to describe such interests when they are not primarily about the fact-check topic.
done_all 3.4 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
We are an independent organization. This is the link to the Norwegian Central Coordinating Register for Legal Entities: https://w2.brreg.no/enhet/sok/detalj.jsp?orgnr=919036508
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The applicant is an independent organization and ownership is clearly stated. A detailed account for funding is provided in the section "Finansiering" (Funding).
done_all 4.1 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
Here is the link to our "About"-page: https://www.faktisk.no/om-oss
Here is the link to our "Finance transparency"-page: https://www.faktisk.no/om-oss/finansiering
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The nature of the organization is transparently described. As previously mentioned, a detailed account for funding is provided in the section "Finansiering" (Funding).
done_all 4.2 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
Here is the link to our "About"-page: https://www.faktisk.no/om-oss
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
It is clear that the organization is owned by a number of media companies, but that the organization is independent. The editorial staff have clear titles and bios.
done_all 4.3 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Yes, relevant bios are provided.
done_all 4.4 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
We inform and link to our contact details in the footer of every page we publish - as well as in the corrections-section on our "about"-page: https://www.faktisk.no/metode#rettelser-og-klager
The details and emails to all our staff is provided here: https://www.faktisk.no/om-oss#redaksjonen
Also, the emails to all our fact-checkers are linked in their bylines in every fact-check.
Most of our daily dialog is on social media, through our fb-page https://www.facebook.com/faktisk
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
I do not believe Faktisk encourages users to communicate but it is stated that it is possible to do so and e-mail adresses are provided. I believe that the communication is encouraged through the Faktisk social media accounts rather than the main website.
done_all 4.5 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Yes, the applicant has a very pedagogical methods section on the website.
done_all 5.1 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Yes, claims seems to be selected based on news events and reach. In the case of Facebook, it is always stated if a fact-check has been published as a cooperation with them.
done_all 5.2 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
In the case where there are doubts, there are several types of assessents of the claim. Both supportive or against the claim. For example, in a fact-check about unemployement, Faktisk has interpreted official data and tried to find a possible explanation to a false claim by helping the audience to interpret the data differently, both dismissing and approving the claim.
done_all 5.3 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
I have not found that there are difference in terms of standard of evidence used. Naturally, the standard of the evidence differ depending on the topic, for example a story about two norwegian scientists inventing a projector that turned out to be fake are using combinations of official databases to search for people, while another story are using assessments by epidemiologists on many uncertain findings that are unfolding due to the Corona pandemic. It is very hard to rate these different types of evidence against each other. My assessment is that Faktisk try to find the best available evidence.
done_all 5.4 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Yes, individuals that have made a claim are contacted. Their response to a claim is published, even though it might not be pleasant to publish. For example one person responded by stating that Faktisk is not a credible source, and Faktisk included this in their fact-check :)
done_all 5.5 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
As earlier mentioned, in the footer of every published fact-check and page, in the dialog on social media and with a thorough description of our methodology in our methodology-page: https://www.faktisk.no/metode
On Faktisk.no we ask readers to send us claims by e-mail: kontakt@faktisk.no and we receive claims through our active twitter account twitter.com/faktisk_n
Also, when it comes to complains, we direct to: https://www.faktisk.no/metode#rettelser-og-klager
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
I wouldn't say that Faktisk encourage users to send in Factchecks, but there is a sentence at the bottom of the page stating that you can send in claims to the signatory. Here, it is not described what readers can expect in terms of what is fact-checkable. However, this is thouroghly described in the Methods section.
done_all 5.6 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
Our correction policy is thoroughly described in our methodology-section: https://www.faktisk.no/metode - and is also directly announced on our front page and on the footer of every page generated on Faktisk.no : https://www.faktisk.no/metode#rettelser-og-klager
When it comes to policies: Our About us section (https://www.faktisk.no/om-oss) has a translated version of the IFCN Code of Principles, and outlined the policy of article 5: A commitment to an Open & Honest Corrections Policy.
In our translation, we state: "We have a transparent corrections policy and follow it always. Our corrections are clearly marked and openly published in compliant with our corrections policy, to make sure our readers sees the correct version."
Also, as previously described, we outline our "House ethics rules", which comes in addition to the Norwegian Press Association's Code of Ethics, which applies to us (https://presse.no/pfu/etiske-regler/vaer-varsom-plakaten/vvpl-engelsk/). These bind us to fair treatment of all sources.
To comply to the standards of media outlets in Norway, our footer includes the name and email address to the editor-in-chief, as well as our general contact address. It also hyperlinks to the Norwegian Press Association's Code of Ethics, the Norwegian Editor's Association’s Code of Ethics, and to the IFCN Code Of Principles. The text says:
"Vi arbeider etter Vær varsom-plakatens regler for god presseskikk, Redaktørplakaten og faktasjekkplakaten. Den som mener seg rammet av urettmessig publisering, oppfordres til å ta kontakt med redaksjonen."
Which translates to: "We follow the Norwegian Press Code of Ethics (link), the Norwegian Editors code of principles (link) and the Fact-Checkers code of principles (link). Anyone who feels afflicted by unfair publication (hard to translate literally) should contact us (link to email).
Also, we publish full bios and contact details for all our staff in the About us section. Every fact-check has a byline with the name and email link to the fact-checkers who wrote the article.
We also have a very active dialogue with our readers by email, Twitter and Facebook page - were the discussion is live almost 24/7.
In addition: Any changes or corrections in a fact-check into a separate section at the end of the fact-check (in example: https://www.faktisk.no/faktasjekker/yDQ/bilister-har-ikke-vikeplikt-for-syklende-pa-grunn-av-gangfelt ), we also have added a separate change/correction logg, which can be followed both on our statistics-section or by RSS-feed: https://www.faktisk.no/endringer
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Yes, the corrections procedure is clearly explained on the website.
done_all 6.1 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
Criteria 6.2
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the corrections policy to verify it meets critera. No additional information needed.
Faktisk.no
16-Nov-2020 (3 years ago)
Regarding the assessors note to Criteria 6.2: Could the assessor to try again, as the link should bring you to the right place. The hyperlink in question points to the headline #faktasjekkplakaten (IFCN Code of Principles) - "https://www.faktisk.no/om-oss#faktasjekkplakaten". The headline which the assessor refers to (#Vedtekter) is the one above on the same page. However, we are not able to reproduce this bug. The referral link works for us both on Crome, Safari, Edge and Mobile IOS.
If the assessor still get the wrong headline by clicking the link, we would like to know which browser and what link it refers to so we can investigate it further.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
The corrections procedure is described under a headline in the about section called (translated from Norwegian) "corrections and complaints". Here a Norwegian external documents with national journalistic ethics guidelines are linked to as well as a translated version of the IFCN guidelines. However, please note that when clicking the link "Den internasjonale faktasjekkplakaten" in the Method section, it does not take you to the right position in the document, rather it takes you to information about the company "Vedtekter". This is a minor edit, that I think the signatory has to change.
cancel 6.2 marked as Request change by Ester Appelgren.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
18-Nov-2020 (3 years ago)
The corrections procedure is described under a headline in the about section called (translated from Norwegian) "corrections and complaints". Here a Norwegian external documents with national journalistic ethics guidelines are linked to as well as a translated version of the IFCN guidelines.
done_all 6.2 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
Any changes or corrections in a fact-check into a separate section at the end of the fact-check (in example: https://www.faktisk.no/faktasjekker/yDQ/bilister-har-ikke-vikeplikt-for-syklende-pa-grunn-av-gangfelt ), we also have added a separate change/correction logg, which can be followed both on our statistics-section or by RSS-feed: https://www.faktisk.no/endringer
All corrections and changes are dealt with this way, and minor disputes mostly solved without further issue.
However, as stated above, The Norwegian Association's Code of Ethics, which also applies to us, gives the public right to complain to the Norwegian Press Complaints Commission. There has been two such complaints against us since our last assessment:
Case 1: https://presse.no/pfu-sak/058-20/
Case 2: https://presse.no/pfu-sak/033-20/
The Commission completely acquitted us on all counts in both cases. However they show that we follow the process accordingly.
Most cases for the Press Complaints Commission are publicly streamed for transparency - and generates media attention.
This is from the latest case (including the stream): https://journalisten.no/faktasjekk-faktiskno-pfu/faktiskno-gikk-fri-i-pfu-etter-klage-fra-krf-politiker/414692
And this is from the first one (including the stream): https://journalisten.no/facebook-facebook-grupper-faktasjekk/soppeljournalistikk-mente-klager-pfu-var-av-en-annen-oppfatning/418463
We have, as far as we know, not received any complaints through IFCN.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Faktisk explains clearly how they do corrections and publish them at the end of every article. The additional corrections log is fantastic if you are looking for all corrections made to the stories on the website.
The applicant provides two examples of formal complaints from the public to the Norsk Presseforbund. The conclusions from these two examples illustrate Faktisk's compliance with the Norwegian press ethics/code of conduct. In both cases it was decided they had not violated this code. These examples were reported on in the trade press and they are proof of that Faktisk follows the code of conduct for journalists in Norway, are using a transparent method when doing fact-checks and that they follow principles of corrections.
There have in fact been cases where the public has complained to IFCN about Faktisk. I know this as I have myself assessed them, but perhaps these were not reported back to Faktisk and it was a few years back.
done_all 6.3 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
How to complain and the link to IFCNs complaints policy is in our complaints and corrections section: on Faktisk.no : https://www.faktisk.no/metode#rettelser-og-klager
This is part of our methodology page - and linked to from every footer on every fact-check and published page.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago)
The signatory provides a link to the IFCN and explains that it is possible to reach them with complaints.
done_all 6.4 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.
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.
Faktisk.no
20-Aug-2020 (4 years ago) Updated: 4 years ago
We are not.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
07-Nov-2020 (3 years ago) Updated: 3 years ago
Faktisk is owned by several media companies and not a unit of one media company. I suppose they are compliant.