PolitiFact is owned by the nonprofit Poynter Institute for Media Studies. PolitiFact had been owned by the Tampa Bay Times, but in 2018 direct ownership of PolitiFact was transferred from the Times to Poynter, which is the newspaper’s parent company. The move allows PolitiFact to function fully as not-for-profit national news organization.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Our%20ownership

PolitiFact is a legally registered organization.

All the explanations about its legal registration are easy to find in the “About us” section here:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Our%20ownership

Some details about its ownership can be found here: https://www.politifact.com/who-pays-for-politifact/

1. PolitiFact started in 2007 as an election-year project of the Tampa Bay Times (then named the St. Petersburg Times), Florida’s largest daily newspaper. PolitiFact was created to look at specific statements made by politicians and rate them for accuracy. 

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#How%20PolitiFact%20Started

2. PolitiFact currently has 14 full-time staffers (a mix of editors and reporters), three paid interns and three freelance contributors. We also have partnerships with local or specialized news organizations that have their own staffers listed on the PolitiFact staff page.

https://www.politifact.com/staff/

3. PolitiFact publishes political fact-checking and tracks the campaign promises of the president. PolitiFact debunks misinformation on social media and is a fact-checker with Facebook's third-party fact-checking program. PolitiFact promotes media literacy and independent journalism. PolitiFact works with academic researchers to study the news ecosystem and how it contributes to an informed electorate.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/

https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/dec/03/state-politifact-2019-report-our-readers/

4. PolitiFact has a mission to fact-check elections and other issues of public interest. In 2020, we are fact-checking the elections of the U.S. president and Congress. We are fact-checking claims about the coronavirus pandemic and COVID-19. We are fact-checking claims about race, inclusion, police brutality and the Black Lives Matter protests. We fact-check other issues as they arise in the news. 

https://www.politifact.com/2020/

https://www.politifact.com/coronavirus/

https://www.politifact.com/race-ethnicity/

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/list/

PolitiFact was set up in 2007, by the Tampa Bay Times, exclusively for the purpose of political fact-checking:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#How%20PolitiFact%20Started

31 persons seem to work fo PolitiFact ; the staff is presented here:

https://www.politifact.com/staff/

But it seems that PolitiFact has only 14 full-time staffers...

The different activities of PolitiFact (fact-checking, debunking, media literacy, research...) are listed here:
https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/
https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/dec/03/state-politifact-2019-report-our-readers/

PolitiFact wants to continue its differents missions in the future: fact-checking and debunking about politics, coronavirus and all the issues that arise in the news.

The answers provided by the leaders of PolitiFact seem trustworthy.

PolitiFact significantly exceeds this criteria. We generally publish two to six fact-checks (or more) five days a week. Here is a link to all the fact-checks published on the site, beginning with the most recently published. 

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/list/

The PolitiFact team effectively lists its published fact-checks here:
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/list/

The applicant has published an average of at least one fact check a week over the course of the twelve months prior to the date of application.

According to our assessment, the fact-checking articles presented by PolitiFact are in line with IFCN's expectations.

We find that these fact-checks deal in majority (more than 80%) with “public interest” issues that “relate to or could have an impact on the well-being of individuals, the general public or society”.

We have no such relationships. PolitiFact does not accept donations from anonymous sources, political parties, elected officials or candidates seeking public office, or any other source with a conflict of interest as determined by PolitiFact’s executive director.

https://www.politifact.com/who-pays-for-politifact/

The applicant’s editorial output is not, for us, controlled by the state, a political party or politician.

Politifact sets out how the team ensure the editorial independence of its work, here:
"olitiFact does not accept donations from anonymous sources, political parties, elected officials or candidates seeking public office, or any other source with a conflict of interest as determined by PolitiFact’s executive director."
"Accepting financial support does not mean PolitiFact endorses the products, services or opinions of its donors. Donors have no say in the ratings PolitiFact issues. PolitiFact does not give donors the right to review or edit content."

https://www.politifact.com/who-pays-for-politifact

We do not receive funding from political sources. 

No funding from local or foreign state or political sources.

"PolitiFact does not accept donations from anonymous sources, political parties, elected officials or candidates seeking public office, or any other source with a conflict of interest as determined by PolitiFact’s executive director."
https://www.politifact.com/who-pays-for-politifact/

We have selected a variety of fact-checks to show that we hold both U.S. major parties to high standards of accuracy in fact-checking. In one instance, we selected a Mostly True fact-check to demonstrate our willingness to let evidence dictate our conclusions. 

Democrats (5):

Mostly False for Charles Schumer, Senate minority leader, on medical malpractice

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/aug/03/charles-schumer/fact-checking-chuck-schumers-claim-republican-bill/

False for Nancy Pelosi, House speaker, for saying President Donald Trump is morbidly obese

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/may/19/nancy-pelosi/no-he-not-morbidly-obese/

Pants on Fire for Joe Biden, former vice president, for claim about being arrested in South Africa

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/mar/04/joe-biden/joe-bidens-pants-fire-claim-about-his-arrest-south/

False for Biden for claim about the history of 2nd Amendment gun rights

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jun/29/joe-biden/joe-bidens-dubious-claim-about-revolutionary-war-c/

Mostly False for Biden for claiming Trump said to drink bleach

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jul/11/joe-biden/no-trump-didnt-tell-americans-infected-coronavirus/

Republicans (5)

False for Trump for claim about mail-in voting

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jul/31/donald-trump/donald-trump-draws-false-distinction-between-absen/

Mostly True for Trump for claiming death rates for COVID-19 were down at the time he spoke

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jun/24/donald-trump/donald-trump-accurate-deaths-coronavirus-are-falli/

False for Trump for claim that COVID-19 cases are up only because of increased testing

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jun/24/donald-trump/donald-trump-wrong-greater-testing-driving-coronav/

False for Kevin McCarthy, House minority leader, for attacks on then-fellow Republican Justin Amash

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/jun/03/kevin-mccarthy/kevin-mccarthy-falsely-says-justin-amash-votes-mor/

False for Pat Cipollone, White House attorney, for impeachment claim about House Democrats

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jan/21/pat-cipollone/senate-trial-pat-cipollone-was-wrong-gop-access-sc/

The applicant fact-checks use the same high standards of evidence and judgement for equivalent claims regardless of who made the claim. We didn't find any example of unfair treatment...

How we choose claims to fact-check

Each day, PolitiFact journalists look for statements to fact-check. We read transcripts, speeches, news stories, press releases, and campaign brochures. We watch TV and scan social media. Readers send us suggestions via email to truthometer@politifact.com; we often fact-check statements submitted by readers. Because we can't feasibly check all claims, we select the most newsworthy and significant ones.

In deciding which statements to check, we consider these questions:

• Is the statement rooted in a fact that is verifiable? We don’t check opinions, and we recognize that in the world of speechmaking and political rhetoric, there is license for hyperbole.

• Does the statement seem misleading or sound wrong?

• Is the statement significant? We avoid minor "gotchas" on claims that are obviously a slip of the tongue.

• Is the statement likely to be passed on and repeated by others?

• Would a typical person hear or read the statement and wonder: Is that true?

We select statements about topics that are in the news. Without keeping count, we try to select facts to check from both Democrats and Republicans. At the same time, we more often fact-check the party that holds power or people who repeatedly make attention-getting or misleading statements.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#How%20we%20choose%20claims

PolitiFact does not seem to unduly concentrate its fact-checking on any one side; it seems to consider the reach and importance of claims it selects to check; and it publishes an explaination on its website to set out how it selects claims to check, here :

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#How%20we%20choose%20claims

The PolitiFact team explains how they maintain standards across fact-checks:

"In deciding which statements to check, we consider these questions:

• Is the statement rooted in a fact that is verifiable? We don’t check opinions, and we recognize that in the world of speechmaking and political rhetoric, there is license for hyperbole.

• Does the statement seem misleading or sound wrong?

• Is the statement significant? We avoid minor "gotchas" on claims that are obviously a slip of the tongue.

• Is the statement likely to be passed on and repeated by others?

• Would a typical person hear or read the statement and wonder: Is that true?

We select statements about topics that are in the news. Without keeping count, we try to select facts to check from both Democrats and Republicans. At the same time, we more often fact-check the party that holds power or people who repeatedly make attention-getting or misleading statements."

In view of what we have observed, PolitiFact discloses in its fact checks relevant interests of the sources it quotes and any commercial or other such relationships it has.

In view of what we have observed, PolitiFact is not as an organization affiliated with any party, any politician or political candidate.

Our ethics policy for PolitiFact journalists

PolitiFact seeks to present the true facts, unaffected by agenda or biases. Our journalists set their own opinions aside as they work to uphold principles of independence and fairness. (See a list of our current journalists and their biographies.)

As part of that effort, PolitiFact journalists avoid the public expression of political opinion and public involvement in the political process.

We don’t make political contributions or work on campaigns. We don’t sign online petitions, post yard signs, or participate in political marches.

We avoid expressing political views on social media. We do share news stories and other journalism, but we take care not to be seen as endorsing or opposing a political figure or position. We avoid snarky commentary.

We may participate in the political process as voters, because we also have responsibilities as individual citizens of the United States. But we keep our votes to ourselves as a matter of principle. Our goal is to be open-minded in all of our work.

This policy applies to full-time staffers, correspondents and interns. We avoid doing anything that compromises PolitiFact or our ability to do our jobs with independence and fairness.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Our%20ethics%20policy

PolitiFact explains its policies to preserve its non-partisan way of fact-checking claims on a page titled “The Principles of the Truth-O-Meter: PolitiFact’s methodology for independent fact-checking” here:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/

And in a specific paragraph here:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Our%20ethics%20policy

The staff evokes:

"As part of that effort, PolitiFact journalists avoid the public expression of political opinion and public involvement in the political process.

We don’t make political contributions or work on campaigns. We don’t sign online petitions, post yard signs, or participate in political marches.

We avoid expressing political views on social media. We do share news stories and other journalism, but we take care not to be seen as endorsing or opposing a political figure or position. We avoid snarky commentary.

We may participate in the political process as voters, because we also have responsibilities as individual citizens of the United States. But we keep our votes to ourselves as a matter of principle. Our goal is to be open-minded in all of our work.

This policy applies to full-time staffers, correspondents and interns. We avoid doing anything that compromises PolitiFact or our ability to do our jobs with independence and fairness.”

In view of what we have observed, PolitiFact identifies the source of significant evidence used in its fact checks, with quite relevant links.

In view of what we have observed, PolitiFact uses most of the time the best available primary sources of evidence. 

In view of what we have observed, PolitiFact checks all key elements of claims.

In view of what we have observed, PolitiFact 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.

We are the fact-checking section of a parent organization.

PolitiFact is the fact-checking section of a parent organization called Poynter Institute for Media Studies, an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit journalism education and research institute.. 

There's a page on its website explaining this:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Our%20ownership

Our ownership

PolitiFact is owned by the nonprofit Poynter Institute for Media Studies. PolitiFact had been owned by the Tampa Bay Times, but in 2018 direct ownership of PolitiFact was transferred from the Times to Poynter, which is the newspaper’s parent company. The move allows PolitiFact to function fully as a not-for-profit national news organization.

The ties between the Poynter Institute and the Tampa Bay Times go back decades. The longtime owner of the Times was Nelson Poynter, whose father had bought the newspaper in 1912. Poynter championed independent journalism and wanted to ensure that the newspaper remain locally owned and protected from chain ownership. So upon his death in 1978, he left the newspaper not to his heirs, but to the school for journalists that now bears his name.

Nelson Poynter was also the founder of Congressional Quarterly, a news organization covering Congress in Washington, D.C., that the Poynter Institute owned until 2009. PolitiFact now continues the Poynter Institute’s historical connection to Washington-based political journalism.

Control of both the Poynter Institute and the Tampa Bay Times lies with a single executive. Upon retirement, that leader picks a successor. Poynter himself picked Eugene Patterson, who picked Andrew Barnes, who picked the Times' current chairman and CEO, Paul Tash, a lifelong journalist.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Our%20ownership

As a fact-checking section of a parent organization, PolitiFact provides a link on its website to the statement about its ownership, here:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Our%20ownership

It explains: "PolitiFact is owned by the nonprofit Poynter Institute for Media Studies..."

PolitiFact also explains the way it finds funds to do its job, here:

"While PolitiFact relies on administrative support from the Poynter Institute, it is otherwise financially self-sustaining. It receives funding from online advertisements placed on the website. PolitiFact also receives compensation for selling its content to media publishers and companies. Organizations that contributed more than 5 percent of total PolitiFact revenues in the previous calendar year be listed here:

• The E.W. Scripps Company

• Facebook

PolitiFact also accepts grants, which are listed by calendar year below.In 2017, PolitiFact launched a membership campaign called the Truth Squad to allow individual donations.

Accepting financial support does not mean PolitiFact endorses the products, services or opinions of its donors. Donors have no say in the ratings PolitiFact issues. PolitiFact does not give donors the right to review or edit content.As part of PolitiFact’s mission to remain transparent and independent, PolitiFact will disclose on this page any individual donation in excess of $1,000. PolitiFact does not accept donations from anonymous sources, political parties, elected officials or candidates seeking public office, or any other source with a conflict of interest as determined by PolitiFact’s executive director."

From How we determine Truth-O-Meter ratings

The reporter who researches and writes the fact-check suggests a rating when they turn in the report to an assigning editor. The editor and reporter review the report together, typically making clarifications and adding additional details. They come to agreement on the rating. Then, the assigning editor brings the rated fact-check to two additional editors.

The three editors and reporter then review the fact-check by discussing the following questions.

• Is the statement literally true?

• Is there another way to read the statement? Is the statement open to interpretation?

• Did the speaker provide evidence? Did the speaker prove the statement to be true?

• How have we handled similar statements in the past? What is PolitiFact’s jurisprudence?

The three editors then vote on the rating (two votes carry the decision), sometimes leaving it as the reporter suggested and sometimes changing it to a different rating. More edits are made; the report is then published.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Truth-O-Meter%20ratings

PolitiFact presents its organizational structure here :

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Truth-O-Meter%20ratings

And here:

https://www.politifact.com/staff/

And makes clear how and by whom editorial control is exercised (Chief editor, deputy-chief editor, etc.).

The PolitiFact staff page. Biographies are also linked from bylines on each fact-check and story.

https://www.politifact.com/staff/

PolitiFact presents a page detailing the professional biography of all those who play a significant part in its articles here:

https://www.politifact.com/staff/

Readers can use this form, linked on the homepage menu, to suggest a fact-check: https://www.politifact.com/suggest/statement/

Staff biographies have clearly designated email addresses and (in most cases) phone numbers.

Our page footer includes a link to the "suggest a fact-check" as well as our mailing addresses and the Poynter Institute's phone number.

It’s easy for readers to contact PolitiFact’s team.

There’s a page that mentions all the addresses, Twitter and phone numbers of the journalists:

https://www.politifact.com/staff/

And there’s a paragraph to explain how it is possible to contact the team here:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#How%20to%20contact%20us

"How to contact us

The best way to contact us for general questions, complaints, praise and ideas for things to fact-check is through our email account, truthometer@politifact.com.

For questions about our Truth Squad membership program, the email is alowry@poynter.org.

You will find contact information for individual journalists, both email addresses and phone numbers, on their staff profiles. See a list of our current journalists and their biographies.

PolitiFact’s mailing address is:

PolitiFact - The Poynter Institute, 801 Third Street South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701"

There's also a specific button on the footer of the website and a specific link in the menu, dedicated to "suggest a fact-check";

https://www.politifact.com/suggest/statement/

 How we choose claims to fact-check; Our on-the-record sourcing; How we determine Truth-O-Meter ratings

How we choose claims to fact-check

Each day, PolitiFact journalists look for statements to fact-check. We read transcripts, speeches, news stories, press releases, and campaign brochures. We watch TV and scan social media. Readers send us suggestions via email to truthometer@politifact.com; we often fact-check statements submitted by readers. Because we can't feasibly check all claims, we select the most newsworthy and significant ones.

In deciding which statements to check, we consider these questions:

• Is the statement rooted in a fact that is verifiable? We don’t check opinions, and we recognize that in the world of speechmaking and political rhetoric, there is license for hyperbole.

• Does the statement seem misleading or sound wrong?

• Is the statement significant? We avoid minor "gotchas" on claims that are obviously a slip of the tongue.

• Is the statement likely to be passed on and repeated by others?

• Would a typical person hear or read the statement and wonder: Is that true?

We select statements about topics that are in the news. Without keeping count, we try to select facts to check from both Democrats and Republicans. At the same time, we more often fact-check the party that holds power or people who repeatedly make attention-getting or misleading statements.

Our on-the-record sourcing

PolitiFact uses on-the-record interviews and publishes a list of sources with every fact-check. When possible, the list includes links to sources that are freely available, although some sources rely on paid subscriptions. The goal is to help readers judge for themselves whether they agree with the ruling.

We always contact or attempt to contact the person, website or organization that made the statement we are fact-checking.

Every fact-check is different, but generally speaking our reporting process includes the following: a review of what other fact-checkers have found previously; a thorough Google search; a search of online databases; consultation with a variety of experts; a review of publications and a final overall review of available evidence.

We emphasize primary sources and original documentation. We seek direct access to government reports, academic studies and other data. It’s not sufficient for us to get something second-hand. We don’t rely on what a campaign or elected official tells us -- we verify it independently.

In cases where PolitiFact must cite news reports from other media that rely on unnamed or unattributed sources (usually due to the extreme newsworthiness of the report), we note that we cannot independently verify their reporting.

How we determine Truth-O-Meter ratings

The goal of the Truth-O-Meter is to reflect the relative accuracy of a statement. The meter has six ratings, in decreasing level of truthfulness:

TRUE – The statement is accurate and there’s nothing significant missing.

MOSTLY TRUE – The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information.

HALF TRUE – The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context.

MOSTLY FALSE – The statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression.

FALSE – The statement is not accurate.

PANTS ON FIRE – The statement is not accurate and makes a ridiculous claim.

The burden of proof is on the speaker, and we rate statements based on the information known at the time the statement is made.

The reporter who researches and writes the fact-check suggests a rating when they turn in the report to an assigning editor. The editor and reporter review the report together, typically making clarifications and adding additional details. They come to agreement on the rating. Then, the assigning editor brings the rated fact-check to two additional editors.

The three editors and reporter then review the fact-check by discussing the following questions.

• Is the statement literally true?

• Is there another way to read the statement? Is the statement open to interpretation?

• Did the speaker provide evidence? Did the speaker prove the statement to be true?

• How have we handled similar statements in the past? What is PolitiFact’s jurisprudence?

The three editors then vote on the rating (two votes carry the decision), sometimes leaving it as the reporter suggested and sometimes changing it to a different rating. More edits are made; the report is then published.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#How%20we%20choose%20claims

PolitiFact gives precisions about its fact-checking methodology, with a lot of details in this specific sections of its website menu:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#How%20we%20choose%20claims

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Our%20sourcing

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Truth-O-Meter%20ratings

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Flip-O-Meter%20ratings

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Tracking%20campaign%20promises

These details seem very clear and accessible.

In view of what we have observed, PolitiFact selects claims to check based primarily on the reach and importance of the claims, and sometimes explains the reason for choosing the claim to check.

In view of what we have observed, PolitiFact sets out in its fact checks relevant evidence that appears to support the claim as well as relevant evidence that appears to undermine it. 

In view of what we have observed, PolitiFact assesses the merits of the evidence found using the same high standards applied to evidence on equivalent claims, regardless of who made the claim. 

In view of what we have observed, and according to its declaration ("We always contact or attempt to contact the person, website or organization that made the statement we are fact-checking." We can find it here: https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Our%20sourcing), PolitiFact seeks where possible (relatively often) to contact those who made the claim. 

We continuously invite users on social media and via our weekly email newsletter to send us claims to check. We also lay out our criteria and invite readers to send suggestions via our website.

How we choose claims to fact-check

Each day, PolitiFact journalists look for statements to fact-check. We read transcripts, speeches, news stories, press releases, and campaign brochures. We watch TV and scan social media. Readers send us suggestions via email to truthometer@politifact.com; we often fact-check statements submitted by readers. Because we can't feasibly check all claims, we select the most newsworthy and significant ones.

In deciding which statements to check, we consider these questions:

• Is the statement rooted in a fact that is verifiable? We don’t check opinions, and we recognize that in the world of speechmaking and political rhetoric, there is license for hyperbole.

• Does the statement seem misleading or sound wrong?

• Is the statement significant? We avoid minor "gotchas" on claims that are obviously a slip of the tongue.

• Is the statement likely to be passed on and repeated by others?

• Would a typical person hear or read the statement and wonder: Is that true?

We select statements about topics that are in the news. Without keeping count, we try to select facts to check from both Democrats and Republicans. At the same time, we more often fact-check the party that holds power or people who repeatedly make attention-getting or misleading statements.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#How%20we%20choose%20claims

There’s a dedicated page to invite readers to submit claims to fact-check on PolitiFact’s website. This page is mentioned witha a button at the bottom of all the website's pages end also in the website's menu. We can find it here:

https://www.politifact.com/suggest/statement/

PolitiFact presents to readers the rules to respect to submit a fact-checkable claim here:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#How%20we%20choose%20claims

Here are the main rules:

"• Is the statement rooted in a fact that is verifiable? We don’t check opinions, and we recognize that in the world of speechmaking and political rhetoric, there is license for hyperbole.

• Does the statement seem misleading or sound wrong?

• Is the statement significant? We avoid minor "gotchas" on claims that are obviously a slip of the tongue.

• Is the statement likely to be passed on and repeated by others?

• Would a typical person hear or read the statement and wonder: Is that true?

So we can say that PolitiFact 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.

How we correct our mistakes

Mistakes happen. PolitiFact corrects errors as quickly as possible and with appropriate transparency.

Major errors of fact – A serious error that results in a new rating or otherwise changes the general outlook of the fact-check receives a mark of correction at the top of the fact-check.

The text of the fact-check is updated with the new information, and an archived copy of the previous fact-check is preserved and linked to. Additionally, the link text for the item is marked as updated. Corrected fact-checks receive a tag of "Corrections and updates."

Errors of fact – Errors of fact that do not impact the rating or do not change the general outlook of the fact-check receive a mark of correction at the bottom of the fact-check.

The text of the fact-check is updated with the new information. The correction states the correct information that has been added to the report. If necessary for clarity, it repeats the incorrect information. Corrected fact-checks receive a tag of "Corrections and updates."

Typos, grammatical errors, misspellings – We correct typos, grammatical errors, misspellings, transpositions and other small errors without a mark of correction or tag and as soon as they are brought to our attention.

Updates – From time to time, we add additional information to stories and fact-checks after they’ve published, not as a correction but as a service to readers. Examples include a response from the speaker we received after publication (that did not change the conclusion of the report), or breaking news after publication that is relevant to the check. Updates can be made parenthetically within the text with a date, or at the end of the report. Updated fact-checks receive a tag of "Corrections and updates."

Explanatory editor’s notes – Sometimes we alert readers to other information that would be helpful, without changing the original report, such as an outpouring of reader response. In those cases, we post an editor’s note, either at the top or the bottom of the report, as appropriate. Editor’s notes are sometimes used on initial publication to explain a special report’s purpose or outlook.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Correcting%20our%20mistakes

PolitiFact gives precisions about its corrections policy in a specific webpage mentioned in the menu, here:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Correcting%20our%20mistakes

“Mistakes happen. PolitiFact corrects errors as quickly as possible and with appropriate transparency...”

And a specific page is mentioned both in the menu and in the footer of every pages, where we can find every corrections and updates: https://www.politifact.com/corrections-and-updates/ 

So we can say that PolitiFact has a corrections policy that is easily visible and accessible. 

We added the following to our corrections policy: "Readers and others can bring errors to our attention by emailing truthometer@politifact.com or contacting the individual reporter. We may not respond in cases where the request for correction is baseless or unwarranted."

The PolitiFact corrections policy sets out :

"Mistakes happen. PolitiFact corrects errors as quickly as possible and with appropriate transparency.

Major errors of fact – A serious error that results in a new rating or otherwise changes the general outlook of the fact-check receives a mark of correction at the top of the fact-check.

The text of the fact-check is updated with the new information, and an archived copy of the previous fact-check is preserved and linked to. Additionally, the link text for the item is marked as updated. Corrected fact-checks receive a tag of "Corrections and updates."

Errors of fact – Errors of fact that do not impact the rating or do not change the general outlook of the fact-check receive a mark of correction at the bottom of the fact-check.

The text of the fact-check is updated with the new information. The correction states the correct information that has been added to the report. If necessary for clarity, it repeats the incorrect information. Corrected fact-checks receive a tag of "Corrections and updates."

Typos, grammatical errors, misspellings – We correct typos, grammatical errors, misspellings, transpositions and other small errors without a mark of correction or tag and as soon as they are brought to our attention.

Updates – From time to time, we add additional information to stories and fact-checks after they’ve published, not as a correction but as a service to readers. Examples include a response from the speaker we received after publication (that did not change the conclusion of the report), or breaking news after publication that is relevant to the check. Updates can be made parenthetically within the text with a date, or at the end of the report. Updated fact-checks receive a tag of "Corrections and updates."

Explanatory editor’s notes – Sometimes we alert readers to other information that would be helpful, without changing the original report, such as an outpouring of reader response. In those cases, we post an editor’s note, either at the top or the bottom of the report, as appropriate. Editor’s notes are sometimes used on initial publication to explain a special report’s purpose or outlook."

PolitiFact doesn't explain in its website that some complaints may justify no response.

The PolitiFact corrections policy sets out :

"Mistakes happen. PolitiFact corrects errors as quickly as possible and with appropriate transparency.

Major errors of fact – A serious error that results in a new rating or otherwise changes the general outlook of the fact-check receives a mark of correction at the top of the fact-check.

The text of the fact-check is updated with the new information, and an archived copy of the previous fact-check is preserved and linked to. Additionally, the link text for the item is marked as updated. Corrected fact-checks receive a tag of "Corrections and updates."

Errors of fact – Errors of fact that do not impact the rating or do not change the general outlook of the fact-check receive a mark of correction at the bottom of the fact-check.

The text of the fact-check is updated with the new information. The correction states the correct information that has been added to the report. If necessary for clarity, it repeats the incorrect information. Corrected fact-checks receive a tag of "Corrections and updates."

Typos, grammatical errors, misspellings – We correct typos, grammatical errors, misspellings, transpositions and other small errors without a mark of correction or tag and as soon as they are brought to our attention.

Updates – From time to time, we add additional information to stories and fact-checks after they’ve published, not as a correction but as a service to readers. Examples include a response from the speaker we received after publication (that did not change the conclusion of the report), or breaking news after publication that is relevant to the check. Updates can be made parenthetically within the text with a date, or at the end of the report. Updated fact-checks receive a tag of "Corrections and updates."

Explanatory editor’s notes – Sometimes we alert readers to other information that would be helpful, without changing the original report, such as an outpouring of reader response. In those cases, we post an editor’s note, either at the top or the bottom of the report, as appropriate. Editor’s notes are sometimes used on initial publication to explain a special report’s purpose or outlook."

PolitiFact doesn't explain in its website that some complaints may justify no response.

REASSESSMENT: PolitiFact explains in its website that baseless or unwarranted complaints may justify no response.

We correct our work routinely. Here are two examples of corrections made in the past year. 

We corrected a fact-check about prisoners with COVID-19 in Michigan. 

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/may/19/facebook-posts/states-do-use-masks-contain-covid-19-prisons/

We corrected a fact-check of Elizabeth Warren on a claim about seafood imports

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/dec/13/elizabeth-warren/fish-tale-elizabeth-warren-goes-overboard-claim-re/

PolitiFact provides credible evidence that it makes corrections openly and transparently, seeking as far as possible to ensure that users of the original see the corrected version.

PolitiFact gives 2 examples from 2 different articles :

"CORRECTION (April 20, 2020): This fact-check originally relied on government data that blended live weight with processed weight. This led us to understate the share of pollock sold overseas, and overstate the amount that went to China. The fact-check has been reflected to show the accurate figure."

"Correction, June 8, 2020: Michigan had more than 2,100 state prisoners with COVID-19, not more than 2,100 state prisoner COVID-19 deaths."

Every corrections and updates are mentioned here:

https://www.politifact.com/corrections-and-updates/

Our participation in the International Fact-checking Network

As part of our ongoing efforts to champion the values of accuracy, transparency and fairness, PolitiFact is a verified signatory of the International Fact-Checking Network’s code of principles.

The network says its code is for "organizations that regularly publish nonpartisan reports on the accuracy of statements by public figures, major institutions, and other widely circulated claims of interest to society. It is the result of consultations among fact-checkers from around the world and offers conscientious practitioners principles to aspire to in their everyday work."

The principles are aimed at common goals or excellence in fact-checking around the world. They include:

• A commitment to nonpartisanship and fairness.

• A commitment to transparency of sources.

• A commitment to transparency of funding and organization.

• A commitment to transparency of methodology.

• A commitment to open and honest corrections.

PolitiFact first became a signatory to the IFCN principles on April 15, 2017, and has renewed its commitment every year since. The application and an independent assessment of our work is available for the public to view via the International Fact-Checking Network.

The network offers a complaint process to the public for anyone who believes that a fact-checking organization is significantly violating its commitment to the principles.

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Our%20participation%20in%20the%20International%20Fact-checking%20Network

PolitiFact is an existing signatory of the IFCN Code of Principles since 2017.

So it has a page, on its website, where it declares itself an IFCN signatory, here :

https://www.politifact.com/article/2018/feb/12/principles-truth-o-meter-politifacts-methodology-i/#Our%20participation%20in%20the%20International%20Fact-checking%20Network

"The principles are aimed at common goals or excellence in fact-checking around the world. They include:

• A commitment to nonpartisanship and fairness.

• A commitment to transparency of sources.

• A commitment to transparency of funding and organization.

• A commitment to transparency of methodology.

• A commitment to open and honest corrections.

PolitiFact first became a signatory to the IFCN principles on April 15, 2017, and has renewed its commitment every year since. The application and an independent assessment of our work is available for the public to view via the International Fact-Checking Network.

The network offers a complaint process to the public for anyone who believes that a fact-checking organization is significantly violating its commitment to the principles."

PolitiFact provides a link to the complaints page on the IFCN site.

https://www.poynter.org/archive/2016/submitting-a-correction-to-poynter-2/

https://www.poynter.org/tag/poynter-corrects/

PolitiFact is owned by Poynter Institute for Media Studies. Even if Poynter is a journalism school, we can consider that it's a media company, cause it publishes a lot of articles in its proper website.

So PolitiFact needs to prove that Poynter has got honest and open corrections policy and to provide evidence that it adheres to this.

We can see its parent media company corrections policy here:

https://www.poynter.org/archive/2016/submitting-a-correction-to-poynter-2/

And its parent media company corrections page here:

https://www.poynter.org/tag/poynter-corrects/