Teyit is a not-for-profit social enterprise that focuses on social impact. Because of institutional infrastructure for social enterprises are underway in Turkey Teyit operates under one company (corporation): Teyit Medya A.Ş.

The company, Teyit Medya A.Ş., has promised not to distribute its revenue to shareholders or head of the board.

The trademark of teyit.org is registered by Teyit Medya A.Ş.. The details mentioned above are available on the website’s “Nedir?” (About) page: https://teyit.org/nedir 

Teyit is a legally registered organization. They are independent and they operate as an independent fact-checking media institution.

1. In times of crisis, suspicious information spreads more and faster than at any time. Teyit’s fact-checking operations started on 26th October 2016, in a climate of crises, in Turkey.

2. Teyit is a team of twenty five people in departments of content, creative, programs and projects, and every department has a team leader to facilitate the action and decision-making process. The team members and their roles can be seen on page https://teyit.org/ekip

3. Teyit does not only conduct fact checking activities for pieces of information (especially on online platforms), but also works to create an ecosystem of verified information and truth in Turkey and beyond. Some of these awareness raising activities are done through Teyit’s newsletters, videos, and a podcast which all speak about the era of the post truth and the ways of tackling this issue from an individual to systemic level. There is also Factory, an incubation program aiming to empower new initiatives in the information ecosystem.

4. Attach additional files for criterion 1.2 if required

The information disorder, which creates the misinformation problem, is one of the biggest problems for the information ecosystem.

Teyit seeks to contribute to a world where critical thinking is the common ground of the information ecosystem. Since Teyit enhances its activities in accordance with this ultimate goal, through system-changing attribution, day by day.

For coming year Teyit's fact-checking team is aiming to contribute the system with different perspectives.

While Teyit continues its routine publications, it also aims to provide people with accurate and data-based information on more complex topics through in-depth research. Focusing on the climate, health and economic consequences of coronavirus and how people affect because of false information or urban memory investigations related to false information will be our priority. Freelance journalists who are unemployed and unable to work due to the conditions of the media ecosystem will be able to produce content in this category.Improving visibility and access by developing more visual-based content formats through the creative team, including the short videos for fact-checking tips and tools, social videos and infographics on fact-checks, podcast episodes for the understanding context of misinformation, digital marketing products (such as WhatsApp sticker pack) which the community of Teyit can interact and humorously spread the word. Teyit is planning to conduct in-depth research in the field of health.

They explained the history of the organization well enough.

They explained the structure of volunteer and professional labor within the organization well enough.

They have some other activities but none of them are conflicting. Conversely, they are in line with their fact-checking activities.

I see no problem regarding criteria 1.2. since their formal structure and daily practices are in line with this criteria. 

We publish several fact checks a week. You can find them on the attachment.  

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1W94uIVB9BzwKgULcSZU_CFUernzGf64A/view?usp=sharing 

Their frequency of publication is more than satisfactory.

The information crisis in Turkey has reached a serious level due to the polarization in the country. Politics in both the national and local level is a very tense topic and most of the political actors are heavily relying on traditional understanding of propaganda. In this political climate, Teyit's policies and publications are in line with the principles of IFCN and they provide a high level of social benefit for their readers and stakeholders. Their non-partisan coverage of news stories that set the political agenda sometimes fills in the gap caused by the journalistic crisis in the country and partisanship of existing media outlets. Their coverage of issues such as health, climate, public services etc. dominates their publications and these contents are totally acceptable in terms of this criteria. 

Teyit has no commercial/institutional relationship with state, politicians or political parties. Teyit explains its funding relationships on page https://teyit.org/finansal-kaynaklar transparently 

No information has been found that the institution has anything to do with a political actor or a state. There is no indication of this in the editorial policies either.

Editorial decisions are taken jointly by the editorial team. The board of directors, partners, investors, funders or the administrative team of the company and the association are not decision-makers in editorial processes.” https://teyit.org/yayin-ilkeleri 

Publication policies are available on the website. These principles are similar to those universally accepted by journalists. It even has special principles based on the principles of fact-checking activity, unlike many newspapers. 

Investigating a case, we research all different sources from different political orientations and take them into account regardless of the perspective of the source. In controversial cases, we absolutely take the opinions of both sides. We watch the balance between the parties that we are investigating the cases about. All the analyses published in Teyit are reviewed two times before publishing by two different editors also in accordance with our impartiality principle. Here are some examples:

https://teyit.org/analiz-ahmet-davutoglunun-65-yasindayim-60-yildir-ulkucuyum-dedigi-iddiasi

https://teyit.org/analiz-videonun-mevlut-cavusoglunun-kizinin-dugun-toreninden-oldugu-iddiasi

https://teyit.org/analiz-emine-erdoganin-yazdigi-iddia-edilen-kitap

https://teyit.org/analiz-a-haberin-drone-ile-cektigi-goruntulerdeki-otobuslerin-hepsinin-ayni-oldugu-iddiasi

https://teyit.org/analiz-trtnin-a-milli-kadin-voleybol-maci-sonrasi-izmir-marsini-kestigi-iddiasi

https://teyit.org/analiz-abd-baskani-bidenin-toplanti-sirasinda-uyudugu-iddiasi

https://teyit.org/analiz-melih-bulunun-cengiz-holdingin-yeni-ceosu-oldugu-iddiasi

https://teyit.org/analiz-mansur-yavasin-suriyeli-siginmacilari-hedef-alan-bir-aciklama-yaptigi-iddiasi

https://teyit.org/analiz-haberturkte-bakan-suleyman-soylunun-katildigi-programda-gazetecilerin-konusma-surelerine-iliskin-iddialar

https://teyit.org/analiz-israil-basbakani-netanyahunun-erdogandan-korktugunu-itiraf-ettigi-iddiasi  

Turkey is a country where polarization is intense. But it is not possible to talk about a simple two-sided polarity relationship. Very different groups can meet around very different ideas. This necessitates diversification in the selection and analysis processes of claims. 

Neither in the sample content nor in the routine content flow of Teyit, I have come across an example that contradicts this principle. 

Impartiality is a consideration in both the selection and handling of claims, and the selection of sources.

https://teyit.org/yayin-ilkeleri is a page about our editorial rules, methodology, and selection criteria. When our visitors click the “Editöryal Kurallar” tab on this screen they could reach our rules about selecting criteria for claims.

A prioritization of three criteria is applied to manage time effectively for choosing the collected claims.

First, we check whether the claim is verifiable based on data and concrete evidence. We do not investigate topics that are allegedly spoken by two people or a group and which cannot be determined whether it is correct or not unless one is present during the conversation, even if they are accessible. Predictions and claims about the future and the assumptions about the events that are expected to occur are not also investigable.

Interpersonal conversations, interpretations, assertions that contain assumptions or predictions for the future, and events that have happened so much back in the past that it cannot be traced are eliminated at this stage. If the claim is not verifiable, it is removed and not considered again in the future.

We choose among the verifiable claims according to the importance and virality in normal times, and also urgency criteria in times of crisis. Criteria do not mean that we will not create content that is not viral; it means that what is viral among multiple works will be prioritized.

○ Virality: A content that is on the agenda of Internet users, and has a certain number of shares. Virality criteria may differ according to the social media platform on which the suspicious news is spread.

○ Importance: A content that can have an impact on individuals, communities, groups, systems, rights, or democracy.

○ Urgency: A content that occurs during moments of crisis where emotional breaks are experienced and which is exacerbated by social anger and fear, and which has the quality that needs to be verified even if it is not viral. (Moment of crisis: periods of emotional elevations, traumatic events, increased polarization in society, increased hate speech related to events, election periods, systemic changes, natural and human-related disasters)

If the claim meets these criteria, the investigation begins after determining who will review it. Those outside the prioritization criteria are archived and can be reviewed again when they meet the publication criteria over time. 

It acts in accordance with the principles stated in its methodology. Relevant principles are available to readers to clear any doubts.

The current and past titles of individuals, their ties to institutions such as membership or management are clearly expressed. In the selection of sources, priority is given to objective and scientific sources. In situations where it is not possible or partially possible, possible conflict points are clearly defined. 

Teyit is an actor that has no ties to political organizations in terms of both its institutional structure and practices. Employees and corporate identity are both distant from political actors. Even company policies and editorial policies clearly require it. Although they are attacked from time to time in Turkey's polarized political and media environment, it is not possible to obtain objective data that they are politically biased.

Currently, on the page https://teyit.org/yayin-ilkeleri it is stated that the editorial principles must comply with the principles of the International Fact-Checking Check Network, as well as the mission of the institution and the principles of independent journalism.

Teyit will also ensure the editorial independence of its work through Conflict of Interest documents (attached). It is one of the documents that should be signed by team members.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1j6m3XWhLkSCYIBeW6LkAFYFmzr33VBdi/view?usp=sharing  

The information note on the impartiality of the employees is publicly available on the website. This principle has been fully implemented.

Teyit performs positively both in terms of reference usage and accessibility of references. References used are mentioned in a proper way. Moreover, they have relevant policies to provide security of the individuals quoted. They meet global journalistic standards in this aspect as well and this is a very good approach in a tense environment like Turkey's mediasphere.

The institution is loyal to the knowledge hierarchy with a scientific approach. In cases where the information becomes subjective, there is a tendency to evaluate the situation together with different authorities and to share the quality of the comments and data with the reader. Teyit editors try to diversify the sources and references when available.

A critical and scientific approach is preferred in analyzes based on a single source. Multiple control methods are applied.

The identities and titles of the stakeholders/sources are clearly defined in analyses. Sources' former and recent titles and positions related to the issue are clearly stated in stories.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WIMbDWdgyk6_XX94tbcWe7QyrNykmV8E/view?usp=sharing 

The required document has been provided by the institution.

https://teyit.org/finansal-kaynaklar

https://teyit.org/nedir 

Necessary information and documents regarding the structure of the institution and the activities of the institution have been submitted.

Teyit shares the process of editorial control on page https://teyit.org/yayin-ilkeleri. On this link, the chart on the Editorial process can be seen on "Yazı İşleri Nasıl Çalışıyor?" tab. A Head of Editorial, one Editor, and two Writers is responsible for the editorial decision-making processes. Team members can be seen on page https://teyit.org/ekip. 

There is a specific page dedicated to the statement about related criteria and it is accessible to everyone.

https://teyit.org/ekip 

Biographies of employees and people with administrative roles are clearly defined on the website.

In our website, key Teyit employees are available via e-mail on the related page. https://teyit.org/ekip

On the other hand, we're trying to encourage our users to send a claim with our WhatsApp number and our e-mail address. For this reason, we've added a banner to our site. Users can also contact us via our contact page. https://teyit.org/bize-ulasin

In addition, all staff personally attend events, are visible to the public as individuals.

Our three newsletters which have more than 20,000 subscribers in total are sent on behalf of our employees with their names and photos. They can also use their own social media accounts to get in touch with our audience.

In principle, we answer all the e-mails and comments in 24 hours if contain a question or request; negatively or positively. 

Teyit is one of the platforms that attaches the most importance to communication between its analysts and its readers. They do this with the contact methods they enabled and contact information clearly stated on their website.

Please see our “Yayın İlkeleri” page: https://teyit.org/yayin-ilkeleri

Especially “Editöryal Kurallar” tab 

A broad and understandable explanation of the methodology and editorial rules is available on the website.

Staying within the context of the methodological approach, analyzes are made without explaining the reason for choosing the subject in detail. Of course, this can be interpreted as a preference regarding the readability of the contents. I see no contradicting practice regarding this criteria. Although no extra effort is made to explain the reason for the selection, the stories are chosen more in line with the IFCN criteria compared to last year, in my opinion. Stories' rate of providing social benefits is higher. The people and communities that will benefit from the results of the analyzes have diversified. The topics and themes examined have also increased.

They have balanced coverage of supporting and contradictory evidences in the stories I analyzed.

A fixed standard was used in handling the evidence. There is a stable approach in accordance with the methodology, not the situation.

The process is managed in accordance with the scientific logic of the information hierarchy. There is no dependence on online claims.  Colored language is avoided in allegations, and factchecking standards are complied with in quoting personal statements.  This is indicated when the process cannot be completed or incomplete for reasons such as security or other reasons.

Teyit followers can send the contents that they are suspicious about via e-mail (info@teyit.org), Twitter mentioning, our contact page (https://teyit.org/bize-ulasin) or our WhatsApp report line +90 (546) 474 54 40 and Telegram account. We collect all the reports in the digital pool that we initiate called Dubito.

What is checkable or uncheckable is clearly stated on our website, under the “editorial rules” section.

We are not able to answer all the reports we receive and let them know about the reasons why due to the intensive flow of reports. But from time to time, we explain how we prioritize the cases or make editorial decisions by the article we publish on our website. https://teyit.org/isimize-geleni-mi-teyitliyoruz

When a claim cannot be examined and concluded, the findings will be published and the reader will be able to see the point where the analysis is blocked.  

Teyit.org is actively encouraging users to send claims or pieces to fact-check. They have multiple channels to enable the active contribution of community. Multiple channels (public or private) are being used. 

Teyit Fact Check operation follows correction policy, which can be found our “Yayın İlkeleri” page: https://teyit.org/yayin-ilkeleri                            

Their complaints policy is publicly available in a visible spot on their website.

Teyit.org's policy document clearly includes the content format that the institution is interested in and the criteria it considers when dealing with it.

As Teyit, we do make corrections to our content, although not very often, in case of;

- A new development on the subject covered

- A mistake made

- Additional evidence obtained etc.

As can be seen, our Editorial Guideline, which can be accessed on our website, the correction process works as follows:

When any changes to the analysis are required, anyone who accesses the analysis written by Teyit will be able to see them. This heading does not include the correction of material and simple errors.

If new data has emerged on the published analysis and if the analysis needs updating based on these new concrete data, the update is announced. Updates are indicated at the bottom of the analysis by explaining the date and time of the update and what was changed in the analysis. Updates are not announced via social media.

If there is a suspicion that there is an error concerning the written analysis, the review process is restarted. If the request for a review comes from the readers, the resource is requested. During the review process, the principle of accessibility of resources is followed. If an error is detected, correction the date is indicated at the bottom of the analysis.

If the error is of a nature that could change the result of the analysis or unfairly affect an individual & institution, an apology is made via social media. The concerning editor determines the quality of the apology.

Analysis on which there are corrections that require changing the result continues to be disseminated until it reaches the number of people the initial version of the analysis has reached.

If an update or correction is required again, the same steps are repeated.

When an analysis of Teyit is refuted by legal means, the correction policy is followed. If an error is detected, the refutation will be published and the content is removed with a statement.

In addition to this information, our followers and readers also have a tremendous contribution to the corrections. When we get reports for an error or deficiency, we immediately reflect it in the text and, if necessary, announce it on social media.

On the other hand we had a conflict resolution policy. If there is a disagreement between Teyit and a publisher about a fact-check, an impartial mediator is reached, if both parties agree on his/her arbitration. If that doesn't work, Facebook's appeal mechanism is applied as a last mitigation resort.

We made various minor corrections during the year. But we didn’t field any serious correction requests from the general public during the past 12 months.  

Since the past years, I have not encountered a problem in Teyit's error correction policy. In general, their methodological approach to this issue and their practical actions are also satisfactory.

https://teyit.org/nedir 

There does not appear to be any problem with this issue.

NA