We all want to know the truth!
We’ve heard the term ‘fake news’ and seen so many statements about lies being told. What can you believe?
Here is some information to help you sort through the news.
Fake news, also known as junk news, pseudo-news, alternative facts, false news, or hoax news, is a form of news consisting of deliberate disinformation or hoaxes spread via traditional news media (print and broadcast) or online social media. Digital news has brought back and increased the usage of fake news, or yellow journalism. The news is then often reverberated as misinformation in social media but occasionally finds its way to the mainstream media as well.
Fake news is written and published usually with the intent to mislead in order to damage an agency, entity, or person, and/or gain financially or politically, often using sensationalist, dishonest, or outright fabricated headlines to increase readership. Confirmation bias and social media algorithms like those used on Facebook and Twitter further advance the spread of fake news. Fake news undermines serious media coverage and makes it more difficult for journalists to cover significant news stories. Anonymously-hosted fake news websites lacking known publishers have also been criticized.
During and after his presidential campaign and election, President Donald Trump popularized the term “fake news” in this sense, regardless of the truthfulness of the news, when he used it to describe the negative press coverage of himself. In part, as a result of Trump’s misuse, the term has come under increasing criticism, and in October 2018 the British government decided that it will no longer use the term because it is “a poorly-defined and misleading term that conflates a variety of false information, from genuine error through to foreign interference in democratic processes.”
2019 CIGI-Ipsos Global Survey on Internet Security and Trust : https://www.cigionline.org/internet-survey 2019?utm_source=google_ads&utm_medium=grant&gclid=Cj0KCQjws536BRDTARIsANeUZ5-yppXy4jH3OLgM-9ErO3WwdGKwPoaXKAhScv5wXSHHesGFFhzCGtkaAqdrEALw_wcB
9 helpful tips to stop yourself from sharing false information. By Nick Robins-Early. Updated 11/27/2016
Snopes is the internet’s definitive fact-checking resource. When misinformation obscures the truth and readers don’t know what to trust, Snopes’ fact-checking and original, investigative reporting lights the way to evidence-based and contextualized analysis. We always document our sources so readers are empowered to do independent research and make up their own minds.
Snopes got its start in 1994, investigating urban legends, hoaxes, and folklore. Founder David Mikkelson, later joined by his wife, was published online before most people were connected to the internet. As demand for reliable fact checks grew, so did Snopes. Now it’s the oldest and largest fact-checking site online, widely regarded by journalists, folklorists, and readers as an invaluable research companion.
We are a nonpartisan, nonprofit “consumer advocate” for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics. We monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by major U.S. political players in the form of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews and news releases. Our goal is to apply the best practices of both journalism and scholarship and to increase public knowledge and understanding. FactCheck.org is a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. The APPC was established by publisher and philanthropist Walter Annenberg to create a community of scholars within the University of Pennsylvania that would address public policy issues at the local, state and federal levels.
Factcheck.org Process: Updated August 2020
At FactCheck.org, we follow a process when we select, research, write, edit, and, if necessary, correct our articles.
Topics: Our topics vary slightly depending on the election cycle. In all years, we closely monitor the factual accuracy of what is said by the president and top administration officials, as well as congressional and party leaders. However, we primarily focus on presidential candidates in presidential election years, and on the top Senate races in midterm elections. In off-election years, our primary focus is on the action in Congress.
Selection: When selecting material to write about, we seek to devote an equal amount of time reviewing claims by Republicans and Democrats. We do that by reviewing statements they make in the same venues.
Our sources include:
Sunday talk shows. We review transcripts of the Sunday talk shows on the major networks and cable stations. (ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox News and CNN.)
TV ads. A paid service provides us with TV ads for all federal elections (president, Senate and House). We review most if not all of the TV ads in the presidential campaigns, but limit our review for other federal races to those that are identified by nonpartisan sources as “competitive” – which, for example, were eight Senate races in 2014.
C-SPAN. During presidential election years, we review C-SPAN videos of campaign rallies and events on its campaign page, if transcripts of the events are not available. We also monitor C-SPAN during floor debates on major legislation and committee hearings on major issues.
Presidential remarks. We review virtually all remarks given by the president, including every speech and press conference. The president’s remarks are available on the White House website, and they are emailed to us from the White House press office.
CQ Transcripts and Rev.com. These services provide us with transcripts of network and cable news shows and/or other events, such as speeches, committee hearings and press conferences. We review transcripts that include the remarks of major U.S. politicians, party leaders, candidates and top administration officials on a daily basis. We also monitor comments made by major political figures to the news media, which will lead us to search for transcripts or videos of the remarks.
Campaign and official websites, press releases and similar materials. We monitor what politicians and candidates say on their websites or in social media posts, such as on Facebook and Twitter.
Research: We systematically go through transcripts and videos looking for statements based on facts. Once we find a statement that we suspect may be inaccurate or misleading, we will engage – or attempt to engage – with the person or organization that is being fact-checked. The burden is on the person or organization making the claim to provide the evidence to support it.
If the supporting material shows that statement is accurate, we will drop it and move on to something else. Our mission is to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics, so we focus on claims that are false or misleading. If the supporting material does not support the claim or if no evidence is provided, then we will conduct research of our own.
We rely on primary sources of information.
Our sources include: the Library of Congress for congressional testimony; the House Clerk and Senate Secretary’s office for roll call votes; the Bureau of Labor Statistics for employment data; the Securities and Exchange Commission for corporate records; the IRS for tax data; the Bureau of Economic Analysis for economic data; and the Energy Information Administration for energy data – to name a few.
We rely on nonpartisan government agencies for expertise, analyses and reports, including the Congressional Budget Office, the Joint Committee on Taxation, the Government Accountability Office, the Congressional Research Service, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and the federal inspectors general.
We also rely on a few respected and trustworthy outside experts, such as the Kaiser Family Foundation on health care data, the Tax Policy Center for tax data and the National Conference of State Legislatures. We also interview experts on other topics as needed – for instance, in researching issues on foreign countries, we would contact experts on those areas. When quoting experts, we disclose relevant biographical information, such as their previous work in government or campaigns — if applicable. Our goal is to use the best evidence.
Editing: After a story is written, it goes through several layers of editing and review:
Line editing. A line editor reviews the story for content. Is context missing? Is the writing clear? Is the word choice accurate?
Copy editing. A copy editor reviews the story for proper style and grammar.
Fact-checking. A fact-checker goes through the storyline by line, word by word, to make sure that every fact is correct and every statement we make and the conclusion we draw is accurate and based on the evidence. All of our stories contain hyperlinks to the source material so that readers can check our facts.
By the time we publish, the story will have been reviewed in most cases by four people who were not involved in the writing and the reporting of that story: a line editor, copy editor, fact-checker and by the director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center, Dr. Kathleen Hall Jamieson, a former dean of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania.
Correction Policy: If any new information comes to light after we publish a story that materially changes that story, we will clarify, correct or update our story and provide a note to readers that explain the change, why it was made and the date it was made. Readers can contact us at email@example.com to request a correction or clarification.
Our goal, as stated in our mission, is to apply the best practices of both journalism and scholarship, and to serve as a nonpartisan, nonprofit “consumer advocate” for voters, regardless of their party affiliation. We treat conservatives and liberals alike and apply exactly the same standards of accuracy to claims made by both sides.
November 23, 2015, Alexios Mantzarlis
Paolo Attivissimo, an Italian debunker. Attivissimo’s blog is not how he makes a living – he is a journalist and a translator, among other things – though he does receive micro-donations, which he mostly spends on pizza. With Attivissimo’s help, I compiled a list of tips for DIY debunking for keen amateurs or journalists who haven’t had any training in verification or fact-checking. It is neither exhaustive nor unprecedented. However, as fact-checkers dedicate more time to spreading the practice beyond their sites, it is helpful to do so in practical terms.
December 5, 201612:55 PM ET
By Staff WriterLast Updated Mar 28, 2020 10:45:35 PM
Confirmation bias is especially prevalent with established beliefs and emotionally significant issues. Examples of confirmation bias are found in news reports, academic research and interpersonal relations. For example, a journalist demonstrates confirmation bias when she interviews only those experts who support her story’s angle. A student writing a research paper illustrates confirmation bias when he only references resources in line with his thesis, and he excludes any contradictory evidence. In personal relationships, people tend to see those aspects of a loved one’s personality that support preconceptions, such as when a mother cannot see any flaws in her child’s behavior or a lover is blind to a partner’s faults.
Confirmation bias is the tendency for people to selectively search for and consider information that confirms already held beliefs. People also tend to reject evidence that contradicts their opinions.
Confirmation bias manifests in three ways. One is the biased search for information, where someone favors evidence that is supportive regardless of its validity. Another manifestation of confirmation bias appears in biased interpretation of evidence according to whether it agrees or disagrees with existing hypotheses held. A third form of confirmation bias is seen in biased memory when someone selectively recalls information that reinforces his or her expectations.