Mongolian Fact-checking Center is a distinct unit within a legally registered NGO, Nest Center for Journalism Innovation and Development. Nest Center is legally registered in Mongolia under registration number 6569935. Mongolian Fact-checking Center's editorial operations are fully independent from the Nest center as approved by the order by the Chairman of Nest Center, dated May 6th, 2020, attached here to this application.

Further information on Nest center is also available on MFCC's website on the following link: http://mfcc.mn/about-us.html and on Nest Center's website at https://www.nestmongolia.org/

Mongolian Fact-checking Center (MFCC) is the Nest Center for Journalism Innovation and Development unit, legally registered as an NGO in Mongolia in May 2020. Details of its registration are confirmed from the State Registry Database here:

http://opendata.burtgel.gov.mn/lesinfo/6569935

The information on its legal registration is available for readers on MFCC's website's "About Us" section here: http://mfcc.mn/about-us.html

The applicant has also provided a state registration document to prove that it is a legally registered organization and the chairman's order to prove that MFCC is a unit solely dedicated to fact-checking.

Mongolian Fact-checking Center is set up exclusively for the purpose of fact-checking. The center employs 3 full-time fact-checkers, including the editor, and 5 part-time fact-checkers. 

Team information can be found here: http://mfcc.mn/team.html

All employees engage in the fact-checking operation, but whether to fact-check certain claim or whether to post it are decided by the editorial team, with the editor making the final call. We do not post specific names of the fact-checker, who mainly worked on the fact-check for the following reasons: 1) Fact-check is normally not done with just one person, 2) Mongolia is a small country. Therefore, by posting names of each fact-checker, we think we are increasing the chances that our fact-checkers will be contacted by a person whose claims have been denied causing personal and physical threats or chilling effects at the very least.

Our initiative started on a Facebook page, where we initially planned to start fact-checking to train ourselves and create a handbook for journalists in order to develop a new approach to recognizing trusted sources, as part of UZEG platform (a web-based platform aimed at supporting freelance journalists by making it easier for them to operate online and thus diversifying the topics that are being covered), which is being developed by Mongolian Fact-checking Center's parent organization. But as we started to understand the idea of fact-checking better, we decided to make it a distinct unit with independent editorial policy and a long term development plan, including pioneering media and digital literacy efforts in Mongolia.

Currently we carry out the following operations every day: 

1. Publish at least one explanatory article every week day. 

2. Post and Publish educational materials on social media platforms as part of #ThinkFirst Campaign, an awareness raising campaign on social media aimed at informing public about the abundance and risks of misinformation online while educating them on ways to prevent themselves from related risks. 

3. Elementary and preliminary level fact-checking training for university students, journalists and potential volunteers. 

Mongolian fact-checking Center's vision is to increase the media literacy of the public, help them to use information as a tool to improve their livelihoods by the act of fact-checking. The information can be found here: http://mfcc.mn/about-us.html

Mongolian Fact-checking center participated in a nation-wide research on the "State of misinformation during Mongolia's parliamentary election of 2020", led by the Press Institute of Mongolia, with focus on Facebook and "Meeting the Challenges of Information Disorder in the Global South" report by Lirne Asia as a qualified expert on Mongolian information ecosystem. We try to engage in surveys and researches that will help us better understand the state of misinformation and media literacy in Mongolia as much as possible.

The following are our plan for 2022-2023:

1. Extend our IFCN Signatory. In a country with low media literacy and low trust in media, being an IFCN signatory has helped us greatly in creating better and more meaningful impacts. 

2. Improve our daily fact-checking operation to increase volume and quality under Meta's Third Party Fact-Checking Partner Program

3. Train and recruit at least one more fact-checker who will be responsible for Kazakhstan information ecosystem and digital environment as part of our expansion plan under the Meta TPFC.

4. Carry out at least 1 awareness raising information campaign for the public as continuation of the "ThinkFirst" campaign, with special focus on Gen Z and elderly population this year.  

5. Translate the Verification Handbooks, 1, 2 and 3 as allowed by EJC into Mongolian and Kazakh as a basic training manual for Mongolian and Kazakh fact-checkers and journalists. 

6. Improve our website 

7. Create a collaboration model with newsrooms and journalism schools 

8. Establish a number of fact-checking student clubs 

among others. 

Mongolia has about 500 media outlets for the small market of three million people. Even though the law guarantees press freedom, most media companies have political affiliations and depend highly on advertisement revenue. According to the Media Ownership Monitor (https://www.mom-rsf.org/en/countries/mongolia/), only one of ten Mongolian media outlets is actively transparent about its ownership. Most media companies do not have or do not reveal information about their legal status, newsroom policy, and structure. Most newsrooms do not have the knowledge and capacity to do fact-checking, producing low-quality journalism.

For this context, MFCC explained its motivation and purpose to the readers on its website. The answers provided by the applicant on why they started fact-checking operations seem trustworthy. The applicant's plan for 2022-2023 is detailed and based on their current activities.

The center employs three full-time fact-checkers, including the editor, and five part-time fact-checkers. The bios and contacts of fact-checkers can be found in the "About Us" section of the website here:

http://mfcc.mn/team.html

MFCC is one of the first two organizations doing professional fact-checking in Mongolia (the other one is Fact Check Mongolia).

Since April 2020, when it published the first content, MFCC regularly updates the website with the new fact-check content.

Please find the list of fact-checks conducted by the Mongolian Fact-Checking Center in 2021-2022 (since our first application) as attached.

All our fact-checks can also be found here: http://mfcc.mn/index.html

Also on our Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/mfcc.mn

The applicant provided a list of 127 fact-checks published from March 12th, 2021, to July 30th, 2022, since its first application. The file attached identifies a brief explanation of the main subject of each content in English.

When tracked from the website, the original versions of the fact-checks published in Mongolian, the description, number, and dates all seem accurate. Here is the timeline of the contents published:

http://mfcc.mn/index.html 

MFCC regularly updates the website with new fact-checks. The applicant has published from six to 24 fact-checks over the six months before the date of application, equaling an average of three fact-checks per week, which makes this criterion compliant.

Please refer to the attachment for the previous question and our website's "fact-checked" section on the following link: http://mfcc.mn/index.html

As per our policy, we choose claims that are actively shared, that may have consequences on the public health, individual and family wellbeing and may have negative impact on people's decision making leading to economic loss, therefore, we believe significantly more than 75 percent of fact-checks fall in line with the criteria. 

In total, 24 fact-checks were published over May, June, and July 2022. Health-related topics dominate the content. For instance, 10 out of 24 fact-checks published in July 2022 were solely related to public health issues, including matters of COVID_19 and vaccines. There were many fact-checks on topics such as economy, and education, which could impact the welfare of the general public. Some fact-checks were about Russia, Ukraine, and China.

Overall, well above 75 percent of the fact-checks published over the previous three months before the application was related to public interest issues.   

Nest Center for Journalism Innovation and Development NGO has our sole financial supporter until we became Meta's third party fact-checking partner in May 2022, starting to collect revenue starting from the month of June. 

Previously, the NGO paid for the staff salary, provided the staff with an office internet access and devices. MFCC and Nest Center for Journalism Innovation & Development NGO are completely independent from political parties or politicians or private entities.

The information about the financial incomes of the parent organization can be found here: http://mfcc.mn/about-us.html as well as on Nest's website here: https://www.nestmongolia.org/ in english. 

In its website's "About Us" section, MFCC states that Nest Center for Journalism Innovation and Development NGO financially supports its operation and ensures the team's editorial independence. The NGO's funding and revenue structure can be found on its website provided by the applicant here in English:

https://www.nestmongolia.org/

The first principle of the center's code of ethics also declares the non-partisanship policy and outlines general rules for the team to prevent bias during the fact-checking here:

http://mfcc.mn/p.html

There is a "Donation" section on MFCC's website. The center's bank account is provided along with the statement that it needs support as it operates for the public interest only and is independent of political parties, politicians, private entities, and individuals.

Their works published over three months before the application showed no evidence of bias towards the government, political parties, or politicians.

Does not apply. 

The following are links to 10 fact-checks that we believe will demonstrate our non-partisanship. 

In the past year, Mongolia went through a presidential election, therefore, the political fact-checks concentrated more on helping public ensure they exercise their rights to vote. Also, most politicized topics in the past year were the following: 

- Ukraine war 

- Comparison between Russian and Chinese Vaccine

- Misleading information on social welfare where mostly the government used to manipulate public opinion to make it more favorable towards themselves. 

Links are as follows: 

1. Chinese vaccine has 73 side-effects #FALSE

http://mfcc.mn/blog-post-42.html

These types of information have been widely spread to depict a bleak picture over the government by saying the Chinese vaccines have side-effects. This sort of misinformation discouraged people from getting vaccinated. Therefore although there was political motivation behind the information and debunking it might have benefitted a certain political party, we decided to fact-check it to inform the public better about the vaccination. 

2. Claims that Sputnik vaccine as a third dose of vaccination prevents against Delta variant very well are MISLEADING

http://mfcc.mn/blog-post-87.html

Contrary to the claims about Chinese vaccine, there have been an influx of claims about Russian vaccine saying that it works better against Covid variants. This was strongly pushed by a previous president's followers also to undermine the current government's efforts, which ultimately results in less people getting vaccinated. 

3. Claims that the government will tax salaries at 36% rate for social security are MISLEADING

http://mfcc.mn/blog-post-44.html

This kind of misinformation are distributed occasionally. We decided to fact-check this at its second wave of spreading as we decided it caused unnecessary tension among the public. 

4. MNT 690,000 will be given out as 1072 stocks return #FALSE

http://mfcc.mn/blog-post-46.html

As the previous three fact-checks may seem pro-government, we hope the assessor will keep in mind that majority of the information is shared by government and by pro-government actors and many of the information that is available actually has the government as a source. 

But this one was actually shared in a pro-government stance that we debunked. In a time of economic difficulty, the government uses information like this to attract more supporters among the public, as the majority of the population is very supportive of the populist policies. But at MFCC, we believe these types of information lead public to irresponsible spending habits therefore we decided to fact-check this to prevent economic consequences. 

5. Voting machine can be hacked by a group of Mongolians are FALSE

http://mfcc.mn/blog-post-70.html

This was done by us to ensure public's right to election. There is a broad belief that the automated machine that Mongolia uses to count votes can be hacked. It would have a chilling effect on voters where they would refrain from casting their votes, because they will think it'll be hacked anyway and that they can not make a difference. 

6. The Government will resign #FALSE

http://mfcc.mn/blog-post-131.html

This was rather a provocative information that almost threatened the government and instigated the public to a certain risky behavior. 

7. President Vladimir Putin "is very grateful to Mongolia and the people of Mongolia" #FALSE

http://mfcc.mn/blog-post-154.html

This was one of a flood of pro-Russian information that was seen at the wake of the war in Ukraine. It was used to make more Mongolians support the Putin regime. 

8. Mongolia next in line to declare default #MISSING CONTEXT

http://mfcc.mn/blog-post-181.html

Since the situation in Sri Lanka became unstable, a number of claims saying Mongolia is going to follow Sri Lanka in a row of defaults broke. It quoted am EIU report, but stated the risk as imminent, whereas the report indicated that this might happen in the next four years. This has been a very difficult fact-check and is the first of a series of fact-checks that will follow. 

9. MagicNet went bankrupt after John Savageau was defrauded and left Mongolia #FALSE

http://www.mfcc.mn/blog-post-69.html

During Mongolia's  presidential election, we published an open letter for all candidates and asked them to openly send us fact-check claims during the advertising period at no cost, which we would choose and balance between different candidates. The letter was published openly and sent officially to all three candidates. 

The National Labor Party, which is the smallest party in the Parliament with one seat, sent us the above claim about a previous business partner of their party's candidate for presidency. 

10. Young people who were holding a sign "Spent less" during the protest were arrested from their homes #MISLEADING

http://mfcc.mn/blog-post-132.html

The claim that stated that young people who goes out to express their opinions are arrested had a chilling effect on the public's willingness to be politically active. Therefore, we published a fact-check and also added some information on legal environments that allow for public to exercise their rights. 

Finally, we hope the reviewer understand the fluid situation in Mongolia's politics and public's unstable opinion towards the current government and think of it within this context to valuate the rationale behind each fact-check. 

To make it easier for the reviewer to assess the information, we have included as attachment the list of fact-checks, dates, verdicts and links. 

These examples provided by the applicant do not show any sign of partisanship and deliver high standards of evidence and judgment for equivalent claims regardless of who made them.

We have made a localized translation of the IFCN's code of ethics when we initially started our fact-checking operation with slight additions that would fit our operation and make our internal management mechanism clearer. The policy can be found here: http://mfcc.mn/fcp.html

In short, Mongolian Fact-checking center's fact-checkers are required to reach out to all possible sources starting with primary source, secondary source, an expert in the field where necessary and use online tools to validate claims made by sources (sources can either be humans or data, reports etc), weigh the information that have been collected before making a verdict.

How we choose claims to fact-check is also regulated by the same regulation document on our website: http://mfcc.mn/fcp.html

In short, we choose to fact-check claims based on our purposes for fact-checking, which are to prevent the public from potential harms due to consuming misinformation, educate the public and to decrease the spread of misinformation. 

The Fact-Checking Manual published on the MFCC’s website (the link provided by the applicant) mentions its fact-checking methodology and selection criteria. It states that the public interest topics such as economy, education, environment, governance, health, and human rights will be prioritized (making at least 75 percent of the content), and claims to fact-check will be selected based on MFCC’s purposes to:

1. prevent the public from potential harm due to consuming misinformation;

2. educate the public on media literacy;

3. and to decrease the spread of misinformation.

As the applicant explains, the Fact-Checking Manual is based on the IFCN’s Code of Principles. The document can be found here:

http://mfcc.mn/fcp.html  

We follow the same requirements and standards for each fact-check and sources and their interests can be found in the fact-checks where it applies, especially for politicians and when we receive requests to have certain facts checked from the public on political issues. 

We have done three fact-checks in the past year as requested by a local mining company but decided not to publish those as the company was in the middle of a conflict with the government at the time and solely publishing the explanatory article that was paid for by the company would have risked the reputation of the fact-checking center. 

Please refer to the attachment provided for criteria 1.3. 

In each fact check, MFCC lists all of its sources and credits them so that the perspective and context of their quotes are evident to readers.

Mongolian Fact-checking Center's staff are allowed to have political beliefs as it's a basic human right, but are forbidden to post it publicly and advocate for their beliefs even on their personal social media accounts. 

They are also required to disclose all previous affiliations with any political parties and the nature of relationship, and hold the highest ethical standards to meet MFCC's Ethics standards, which is the direct translation of IFCN's key principles.

The standards can be found here: http://mfcc.mn/p.html

The applicant’s editorial work is effectively independent and does not show support for the state, any party, or politicians. Contents related to the government or politicians constitute only a minor portion of the fact-checks. Those contents focus on fact-checking news coverages or social media posts that favor/disfavors one side, providing readers with an evidence-based, independent review.

Our policy for non-partisanship is stated at this link: http://mfcc.mn/p.html

All fact-checkers (currently the policy is applied only to fact-checkers and editors as this is the only position we have) are required to follow this ethical standards in their daily operations and in their social media footprint. If they are found to be in violation of these policies, they will be immediately required to leave the center. As this is an internal management procedure, this is regulated by the labor contract we sign with the fact-checkers. 

In the link provided by the applicant, MFCC states that it follows the fact-checkers code of principles of the International Fact-Checking Network, the first principle that guarantees the commitment to non-partisanship and fairness. The code of principle in Mongolian can be found here:

http://mfcc.mn/p.html

Moreover, its Fact-Checking Manual mentions how the staff members are required to follow nonpartisanship and avoid conflict of interest in their fact-checking:

http://mfcc.mn/fcp.html 

We believe the source is the most important element in a fact-check, therefore we aim to state the sources that we use in our fact-checks as clearly as possible, while trying not to compromise the readability of the fact-check. Therefore, we state all the key sources that led us to the verdict in the main body of the fact-check and list all other relevant or discovered to be irrelevant sources at the side of each fact-check accompanied with list of tools that we have used wherever applicable.

An example can be seen from a recent fact-check: 

http://mfcc.mn/blog-post-194.html

Last year, with the help of our IT team, we made a small modification to our website, to show all used sources separately, making it easier for readers to identify them and access each link, moving all links to sources from the foot of the explanatory article to the side of the main body of the article. 

In all stories reviewed, the fact-check summaries were explained step by step in a way that enables readers to replicate the fact-check on their own. Same time, the contents educate readers on how they should fact-check. The list of all sources (primarily open-source documents, links to the original articles if other media contents were quoted) and related information was provided at the side of the fact-check content.

We aim to reach out to primary sources wherever possible, and we state the fact that we have approached the primary source in each of our fact-checks accompanied with information on whether it as been successful. We try to state a clear information about who the primary source is in cases it would not compromise the physical safety or the livelihood of the person. In case the primary source is a document or a report, we always mention it with the link to the file or the attachment of the file itself. There are cases that when we approach the primary source, they try to influence our operation and make us cancel publishing the findings. Therefore, our policy, which can be found here: http://mfcc.mn/fcp.html regulates that we should not fall into such persuasions. 

The randomized sample of fact-checks suggests that the applicant uses the best available primary sources. All the information about the sources (full name, title) quoted is clearly stated and provides relevant links where the primary source is available online, or attach the file itself.

As regulated by the guide to fact-checking which can be found here at this link: http://mfcc.mn/fcp.html in order to check a certain claim, we reach out to multiple sources. The political situation in Mongolia makes it hard even to believe official policy organizations' claims, therefore we reach out to multiple sources starting from primary source, a person who have been a witness to the event and use reports, data or tools that could validate the claims made by humans. In addition to our policy, especially since the election of 2020, we push for a practicality where we try to always validate human sources with data, official decision that is signed and stamped by governing bodies. MFCC staff has also participated in various trainings by international professionals that would enable us to use tools in a more professional and effective way.  

The applicant cites multiple sources in their works, such as official documents, studies, confirmation, or explanation by an official or an expert.

We clarify political interest of people who make certain claims in our fact-checks whenever we feel it's relevant to the key verdict of the fact-check. This happens with political fact-checks most commonly. After clarifying the political interest of the source or the person who makes the claim, we approach another source to balance out the claim and publish them where relevant. 

A randomized sample of fact checks suggests that the applicant uses various sources in a balanced way. There was no example of showing bias to any source in particular. In some content related to politics, it identifies the relevant interests of the sources it uses where the reader might consider those interests could influence the accuracy of the information provided.

We are a fact-checking unit of an independent nonprofit organization. Proof can be found in the attachment, which are also attached to criteria 1.1, and also on our website on this link: http://mfcc.mn/about-us.html

Mongolian Fact-checking center operates at the office of the Nest Center for Journalism Innovation and Development at no cost to the center. It is financially supported by the Nest center for Journalism Innovation and Development NGO for staff salary, and recently, it has become Meta's third Party Fact-checking Partner, which is currently the Mongolian Fact-checking Center's only source of revenue. Although, Nest Center for Journalism Innovation and Development NGO supports its own operations and MFCC's through grants, media market research service, paid training for journalists and through social marketing consulting service it provides to media sector customers.

The information can be found in detail here: https://www.nestmongolia.org/ on Nest's website in English as well as linked here: http://mfcc.mn/about.html in Mongolian from MFCC's website. 

In the past year, The Nest Center has received grants from Spirit of America, a US non-profit organization to help Mongolian media startups introduce a sustainable business model in their daily operations, with an aim to help them become independent from politicians and business interests; Internews, to carry out a sub-granting project allowing freelance journalists to carry out a reporting project on biodiversity issues in Mongolia; The Poynter institute, to carry out the Global Mentorship Project as a mentor for the Product Immersion for Small Newsrooms project and from training within the Fulbright Specialist Program. Prior to submitting the application for renewal of the IFCN Signatory, we have received a month payment from Meta as their third party fact-checker. 

The Nest Center aims to have all its operations - paid and not paid to best tailor for the needs of news consumers and ensure their right to be informed.

All these information are transparently published on both MFCC's and Nest Mongolia NGO's website on the links above. 

MFCC is a fact-checking unit of the legally registered NGO Nest Center for Journalism Innovation and Development, which is introduced on its website’s “About Us” section:

http://mfcc.mn/about-us.html 

The applicant provides sufficient information on its webpage on its funding for 2021-2022. The information can be found on the NGO’s website in English here: https://www.nestmongolia.org/

Also, in Mongolian at the MFCC’s website here: http://mfcc.mn/about.html.  

We are a "fact-checking section of an other parent organization". 

The statement can be found here:

http://mfcc.mn/about-us.html

Funding details of our parent organization can be found here https://www.nestmongolia.org/ on our parent organization's website in English and here on our website in Mongolian: http://mfcc.mn/about.html  

In the “About Us” section of the webpage, it is stated that MFCC is a fact-checking unit of the Nest Center for Journalism Innovation and Development. The page also mentions the legal status and the state registration number of the parent organization:

http://mfcc.mn/about-us.html

Funding details of the Nest Center for Journalism Innovation and Development can be found here: https://www.nestmongolia.org/.

The information can be found on the following links.

The following link explains how editorial control is exercised: http://mfcc.mn/fcp.html

On the following link, the assessor will be able to see introductions to each team member and their roles at the Mongolian Fact-checking center: http://mfcc.mn/team.html

The organizational structure of the Nest Center for Journalism Innovation and Development is clearly stated on its and the MFCC’s website:

https://www.nestmongolia.org/

http://mfcc.mn/about.html

According to the “Our Team” section of MFCC’s webpage, Battsetseg Enkhtaivan is the editor-in-chief.

The Fact-Checking Manual published on the MFCC’s website (the link provided by the applicant) explains how editorial control is exercised: http://mfcc.mn/fcp.html.

On the following link, the assessor will be able to see introductions to each team member and their roles at the Mongolian Fact-checking center: http://mfcc.mn/team.html

Professional biographies and contact information of all seven fact-checkers, including one editor-in-chief, are available here:

http://mfcc.mn/fcp.html

Readers can send us requests to have certain claims fact-checked at http://mfcc.mn/factcheck.html. 

This link is accessible to readers at the end of every fact-check posted on our website and at the top menu line on our website.  

MFCC provides various opportunities for readers to communicate with the editorial team:

1. "Our Team" section of the webpage mentions phone numbers, email addresses, and links to the social media accounts of its editor and fact-checkers: http://mfcc.mn/team.html

2. There is a generic email address (info@mfcc.mn), phone number, office address, and social media links to the MFCC page on the website's footer.

3. There is a "Request fact check" section at the top menu line of the webpage where readers can send requests to have specific claims verified by filling out the simple form of the name, email address, and the link they want to be fact-checked with the brief description.

4. At the end of every fact-check published, it is mentioned that readers can contact the editorial team at hello@mfcc.mn with any feedback on the content.

The policy can be found here: http://mfcc.mn/fcp.html

In short, we choose claims to fact-check based on their importance and potential to influence reader's life and livelihoods (consequential), its reach and educational values. Wherever necessary, we state the reason why we chose to fact-check a certain claim. 

And we explain all the procedures we take when doing the fact-check in a way that can be replicated by the reader.

The applicant has provided a link to its Fact-Checking Manual, which describes its fact-checking methodology and process.

We state the reasons why we choose to fact-check a certain claim either at the beginning or at the end of each fact-check depending on the nature of the narrative. We choose the claims to fact-check depending on the importance and educational value of the topic in circulation. 

The reviewed fact checks demonstrate that the MFCC selects claims based primarily on the reach and importance of the claims. Many works state the reason for choosing a certain claim to check.

We state in our fact-checks all types of sources, the flow of events that has happened during the research, how it has changed or evolved and make the verdict by weighing the timeliness and rigor of the evidences and sources mentioned. Links to all sources and materials used and found during the process are seen in a separate column at the right corner of the explanatory article. 

The information provided by an applicant is accurate. The randomly selected sample suggests that the MFCC consistently sets out in its fact checks relevant evidence that appears to support the claim and relevant evidence that appears to undermine it.

We examine each source official or unofficial with the same high standards. We try to use a tool or data or a report to validate each claim made by a human where possible by keeping in mind the limitations tools and reports may have. We also approach academic sources to get professional background on complex situations. 

The reviewed fact-checks demonstrate that the applicant maintains a balanced, professional approach to different claims and sources. MFCC assesses the merits of the evidence found using the same high standards applied to evidence on equivalent claims, regardless of who made it.

First we try to identify the motives of the person who made the claim for making that claim, which is not necessary for all fact-checks and then we check the sources that are mentioned or quoted in the initial claim when applicable followed by contacting the person who made the claim to make clarifications.

Our policy dictates that we should contact the person who made the initial claim unless doing so may affect the fact-checkers' independence. We do have a clause dictating that regardless of the source asking to not publish the fact-check, fact-checkers have the right to decide for themselves whether or not to publish the article following the same high standards, but we discuss editorially about the necessity to contact the sources prior to making an action. 

We used to use our cell phones to contact these sources, but after receiving a number of angry calls and threats, we decided to install an office phone and introduced a new policy that require using the office phone instead of their cell phones to prevent fact-checkers from being exposed to discouraging calls and threats. 

The randomly selected sample suggests that the applicant seeks to contact those who made a claim, provides their responses appropriately, mentions additional information obtained and explains if they fail to reply in their published fact checks. Even though most fact checks are based on the claims that appear online or on social media, the applicant verifies the reliability of the social media account that posted the claim and tries to reach for a response.

What can be fact-checked and what can't be fact-checked are stated here: http://mfcc.mn/fcp.html

Our contact us page is here: http://mfcc.mn/factcheck.html

Readers are encouraged to contact us in as many ways as we can offer. All news reports are followed by a contact us and corrections policy note with a link to the contact us page. The page's link is also found at the top menu line on our website. 

Also, after becoming Meta's Third Party Fact-checking Partner, we've amended our Corrections policy to add ready-to-use templates for appeals and started operating a new email that will be exclusively used for appeals requests at appeals@mfcc.mn. 

A “Request Fact Check” page invites readers to submit claims to fact-check by filling the form with the name, email address, and the link they want to be fact-checked with a brief description. The page locates at the top menu line:

http://mfcc.mn/factcheck.html 

Also, the link to the Fact Checking Manual provided by the applicant thoroughly explains what can be fact-checkable and how the editorial team selects claims to fact-check.

Our corrections policy can be found here: http://mfcc.mn/cp.html

Complaints can be submitted on our contact us page and through a link forwarded at the foot of every fact-check. 

After becoming Meta's Third Party Fact-checking Partner, we've amended our Corrections policy to add ready-to-use templates for appeals and started operating a new email that will be exclusively used for appeals requests at appeals@mfcc.mn. 

MFCC's corrections policy is easily accessible and referenced in every fact check published. First, the corrections policy appears on a specific page provided by the applicant:

http://mfcc.mn/cp.html

Secondly, at the end of every fact check, the following information is provided for readers:

If you have feedback, corrections, or other complaints related to our center's fact checks, please reach our editor at hello@mfcc.mn email address. 

The policy clearly sets out how MFCC makes corrections, what kind of mistakes qualify for a correction and in what cases it would be considered an update. 

The corrections policy can be found here: http://mfcc.mn/cp.html

The correction policy provides precise definitions of how major mistakes are handled and how the corrections and revisions are published.

Since we applied last year, there has not been a case or a request where we needed to make a correction. 

As the applicant mentions, no correction has been published since the MFCC applied last year. 

We try to promote our membership at all place possible. But we have a dedicated space at the right column of every explanatory article briefly explaining how we fact-check and linking to our policies. 

Here, below our logo within the IFCN's, we link to the Complaints Policy page at IFCN's website, explaining that readers can have our work reviewed by the IFCN. 

http://mfcc.mn/blog-post-194.html

The above is an example, although the page is shown within all explanatory articles. 

The MFCC has a dedicated space in the right column of every fact check, briefly explaining its policy. In this column, below its IFCN Signatory logo, there is a link to the Complaints Policy page on IFCN's website, explaining that users can have their work reviewed by the IFCN. 

The corrections policy is stated on the mfcc.mn website on the following link: http://mfcc.mn/cp.html

And the parent company's pledge to adhere to the correction's policy is guaranteed by the order of Nest center for Journalism Innovation and Development NGO's Chairman dated May 6th, 2020 attached here, on article 9.

The order states clearly that Nest Center for Journalism Innovation & Development collectively adheres to the Open and Honest Corrections policy. 

The parent organization recently launched its own website, but has not published the corrections policy on the new website as the parent organization does not carry out any editorial operation outside of the Mongolian Fact-checking Center. 

As mentioned before, the MFCC has an open and honest corrections policy available on its website:

http://mfcc.mn/cp.html 

But the parent organization, the Nest Center for Journalism Innovation and Development, does not have it published on its website. The applicant attached an official document of the order by its chairman, which says it adheres to the Open and Honest Corrections policy. The NGO does not carry out any editorial operation outside of the MFCC.