Organization: Polígrafo
Applicant: Fernando Esteves
Assessor: Sergio Lüdtke
Conclusion and recommendations
Sergio Lüdtke wrote:
Polígrafo is an organization dedicated to Fact-checking, with dozens of reports already published and, as a rule, follows IFCN guidelines. There is a notable commitment to didacticism and its policies are clear and transparent, although more detailed information on funding, revenues and expenditures are lacking. As a suggestion for improvement, the website could adopt shortcuts to its methodology and corrections could be displayed on content pages. The website also could use more links to give readers the ability to repeat the path of the investigation.
Sergio Lüdtke recommended Accept
Section 1: Organization
Criterion 1a
Proof of registration
Evidence required: Please provide evidence that the signatory is a legally-registered organization set up exclusively for the purpose of fact-checking or the distinct fact-checking project of a recognized media house or research institution.
Polígrafo
11-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Here is a link to a formal document that proves Polígrafo (owned by Inevitável e Fundamental) is a legally-registered organization:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1T0R1UPh_WvYVXI_bayAbX5dY_9vR6tKS
Also, in our “Who we are" page we have information about our official registration, with the legal number “515112178". Here is the link:
https://poligrafo.sapo.pt/institucional/artigos/ficha-tecnica
Sergio Lüdtke Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
The applicant is a journalistic organization legally established but the Fact-Checking activity is not clearly described as the object of the company. However, its website is clearly dedicated to the Fact-Checking but it is not exclusively. There are articles and reports published on the Polígrafo's website as well. To reinforce its role, Polígrafo announces itself as the first Portuguese newspaper of Fact-Checking.
Although the organization presented documents that prove its registration as a legally established organization with two partners, the documentation does not include the name of the main shareholder of INEVITÁVEL E FUNDAMENTAL LDA.
There is yet another confusing spot on the About Us page of the Polígrafo website. Even though on the About Us page there is a notice that the trademark belongs to INEVITÁVEL E FUNDAMENTAL LDA, the page lists a distinct ownership structure, with three partners. My suggestion is that this point is made more explicit.
download (11).png (59 KB)
done_all 1a marked as Fully compliant by Sergio Lüdtke.
Criterion 1b
Archive
Evidence required: Insert a link to the archive of fact checks published in the previous three months. If you do not collect all fact checks in one place, please explain how the fact-checking is conducted by your organization.
Polígrafo
11-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Poligrafo is a fact-checking website, the first of its kind in Portugal. We also publish some exclusive news and interviews but 99% of or contents are fact-checks.
Sergio Lüdtke Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
The applicant has published dozens of reports in the last three months and all of the claims analyzed was evaluated on the basis of their accuracy. Some of them are claims also early evaluated by foreign Fact-Checking organizations.
done_all 1b marked as Fully compliant by Sergio Lüdtke.
Section 2: Nonpartisanship and Fairness
Criterion 2a
Body of work sample
Evidence required: Please share links to ten fact checks that better represent the scope and consistency of your fact-checking. Provide a short explanation of how your organization strives to maintain coherent standards across fact checks.
Polígrafo
11-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Fact-check both the government ando the opposition is a major concern. We make a big effort to reflect the various sides of the political spectrum trough our work. At Polígrafo, journalists are not allowed to join political parties. You can find more about our values regarding nonpartisanship and fairness in this link: https://poligrafo.sapo.pt/institucional/artigos/estatuto-editorial.
We have also analyse influencers/opinion leaders on TV and social media. Here are some links to our work:
2. https://poligrafo.sapo.pt/politica/artigos/2165
4. https://poligrafo.sapo.pt/fact-check/rui-rio-equivocou-se-com-a-historia-parlamentar
8. https://poligrafo.sapo.pt/fact-check/a-divida-publica-aumentou-desde-que-o-atual-governo-tomou-posse
Sergio Lüdtke Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
From the publications analyzed, it is possible to say that Polígrafo does a balanced coverage, according to its Estatuto Editorial, and it considers in the decision of which claims will investigate the relevance and the spreading potential of the hoax.
To help with the Polígrafo's transparency, the website created a very welcome block on the homepage called Radar. In it, Polígrafo displays some personalities names accompanied by graphs that show the number of checked about each of them and comparative claims on the results of the checks.
As a suggestion for improvement, the publications could make clearer the total engagement in each social network and the measurement period. And it should avoid giving links or reproducing the false content debunked as well.
download (12).png (170 KB)
done_all 2a marked as Fully compliant by Sergio Lüdtke.
Criterion 2b
Nonpartisanship policy
Evidence required: Please share evidence of your policy preventing staff from direct involvement in political parties and advocacy organizations. Please also indicate the policy your organization has as a whole regarding advocacy and supporting political candidates.
Polígrafo
11-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
We believe journalists can and should have political convictions but can not publicly express them representing Polígrafo. For the sake of transparency, we do not accept journalists who belong to a political party. If any Polígrafo's journalist accepts any political function, he is immediately removed from the organization. Here is a link to our Editorial Statute: https://poligrafo.sapo.pt/institucional/artigos/estatuto-editorial
Sergio Lüdtke Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
No signs of favouritism were found to any party or politician in the analyzed content. Although the commitment to exemption is clear in the Editorial Statute ["The POLÍGRAFO does not have a political-ideological agenda. Journalists who collaborate with the POLÍGRAFO are not militants of any political party"], the emphasis on the application text ["For the sake of transparency, we do not accept journalists who belong to a political party. If any Polígrafo's journalist accepts any political function, he is immediately removed from the organization"] could be adopted in the Editorial Statute.
done_all 2b marked as Fully compliant by Sergio Lüdtke.
Section 3: Transparency of Sources
Criterion 3a
Sources Policy
Please share a brief and public explanation (500 words max) of how sources are provided in enough detail that readers could replicate the fact check. If you have a public policy on how you find and use sources for your fact-checking, it should be shared here.
Polígrafo
11-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
We have a policy of total transparency regarding to the sources we use. Whenever possible, we provide links to the original sources, which may be reports, studies, statistics or news from other newspapers. Frequently we provide links to complete documents, so that anyone can corroborate their validity. We don't use anonymous sources or off the records. You can find our sources policy at this link:
https://poligrafo.sapo.pt/institucional/artigos/o-nosso-metodo
Sergio Lüdtke Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
The transparency policy is well reported on the page that details "Nosso Método" and the narrative is consistent and didactic in explaining what has been verified. But although the links to the main sources are linked to the text, some of the conclusions not always link to the original sources. That eventually absence of links prevents the reader to easily repeating the way of the investigation and leaves the reader with the only alternative of trusting on what the website is reporting.
download (13).png (91 KB)
done 3a marked as Partially compliant by Sergio Lüdtke.
Section 4: Transparency of Funding & Organization
Criterion 4a
Funding Sources
Evidence required: Please link to the section where you publicly list your sources of funding (including, if they exist, any rules around which types of funding you do or don't accept), or a statement on ownership if you are the branch of an established media organization or research institution.
Polígrafo
11-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Polígrafo is owned by Inevitável and Fundamental, which has 3 shareholders: Fernando Esteves, Bcreative media and Emerald Group. Our identification and the participation that each shareholder holds can be seen here:
https://poligrafo.sapo.pt/institucional/artigos/ficha-tecnica
Our funding comes from advertising and organization of media literacy workshops. We don’t accept donations from national government.
Sergio Lüdtke Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
The statement of ownership is displayed on the website but there are doubts on two different stockholdings already pointed out in Criterion 1a. However - and despite the statement on the application that "funding comes from advertising and organization of media literacy workshops. We don’t accept donations from national government" -, information on the organization's financing, revenues and expenses are not displayed on the website.
download (14).png (342 KB)
done 4a marked as Partially compliant by Sergio Lüdtke.
Criterion 4b
Staff
Evidence required: Please link to the section detailing all authors and key actors behind your fact-checking project with their biographies. You can also list the name and bios of the members of the editorial board, pool of experts, advisory board, etc. if your organization has those.
Polígrafo
11-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Sergio Lüdtke Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
The staff is listed on the website as well as the names of professionals and partner organizations. Also, professionals' emails are listed. However, there is no biographical information about them and no links to other pages where this information is available.
done 4b marked as Partially compliant by Sergio Lüdtke.
Criterion 4c
Contact
Evidence required: Please link to the section where readers can get in touch with the organization.
Polígrafo
11-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
There isn't a specific section. You can find it at several locations:
https://poligrafo.sapo.pt/institucional/artigos/o-nosso-metodo
https://poligrafo.sapo.pt/institucional/artigos/ficha-tecnica
Sergio Lüdtke Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Polígrafo offers many contact points disseminated throughout the website and invites its readers incessantly to participate in the coverage with complaints, suggestions or comments.
done_all 4c marked as Fully compliant by Sergio Lüdtke.
Section 5: Transparency of Methodology
Criterion 5a
Detailed Methodology
Evidence required: Please link to a section or article detailing the steps you follow for your fact-checking work.
Polígrafo
11-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Sergio Lüdtke Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Yes, the description of the methodology is clear and is displayed on a specific page accessible from the menu and the page footer. As a suggestion, Polígrafo could also link to the methodology also on the pages where it publishes its checks.
done_all 5a marked as Fully compliant by Sergio Lüdtke.
Criterion 5b
Claim submissions
Evidence required: Please link to the page or process through which readers can submit claims to fact-check. If you do not allow this, please briefly explain why.
Polígrafo
11-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Our readers are highly encouraged to request a fact-check. They can do it directly from any journalist or from Polígrafo's director trough their e-mail addresses. They can also do it through a WhatsApp and a Telegram line, both accessible on our homepage. They can also do so from the general address: contactos@poligrafo.pt, also accessible at several locations. Here are some links:
Sergio Lüdtke Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Even though Polígrafo makes many calls to action all over the website by inviting his readers to send checking suggestions, there is not a page clearly destined for this with a specific form and describing what kind of claims can be fact-checked.
done 5b marked as Partially compliant by Sergio Lüdtke.
Section 6: Open & Honest Corrections Policy
Criterion 6a
Corrections policy
Evidence required: Please link to the page with your policy to address corrections. If it is not public, please share your organization's handbook.
Polígrafo
11-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Polígrafo has an open and honest corrections policy. It can be read here:
https://poligrafo.sapo.pt/institucional/artigos/o-nosso-metodo
Sergio Lüdtke Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
The policy for corrections is clear and transparent and is described on the "Our Method" page. Contact points for submitting fix requests are also highlighted and with links associated with them in the method description. A button or a link to submit correction requests on each content page would be most welcome.
done_all 6a marked as Fully compliant by Sergio Lüdtke.
Criterion 6b
Examples of corrections
Evidence required: Please provide two examples of a correction made, or correction requests handled, in the past year.
Polígrafo
11-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Sergio Lüdtke Assessor
27-Feb-2019 (5 years ago) Updated: 5 years ago
Polígrafo submitted two links to articles whose contents were reviewed and it is very clear on the pages what was corrected and whether a re-evaluation of the result of the check was necessary. The site, however, does not offer a page where the readers can view a list of contents that have been reviewed for corrections and does not even identify those contents in its publication lists.