CORRECTIV.ORG

Organization: CORRECTIV.ORG
Applicant: David Schraven
Assessor: Marco Maas
Assessor: Bernhard Schneider
Conclusion and recommendations
on 20-Nov-2018 (1 year ago)

Bernhard Schneider wrote:

Correctiv.org is what it claims to be and is committed to a high standard of transparency, ethical journalism and fact research.

on 20-Nov-2018 (1 year ago)

Bernhard Schneider 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.

CORRECTIV.ORG
10-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)

Find all about our registration here: https://correctiv.org/kontakt/impressum/

We are registered as a non profit organization with the commercial register of the town of Essen in Germany. Our registration # is HRB 25135

Our factchecking newsroom is a distinct fact-checking project of organization. 

Please find attached our registration.


Files Attached
picture_as_pdf 15_Handesregister_Au... (156 KB)
Marco Maas Assessor
25-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)
Criterion empty.
Bernhard Schneider Assessor
20-Nov-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

The impressum is in line with the company register extract and with one expects to find in the self-declaration of an association dealing with fact-checks in journalism on a non-for-profit base.


done_all 1a marked as Fully compliant by Bernhard Schneider.

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.

CORRECTIV.ORG
10-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)
Marco Maas Assessor
25-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)
Criterion empty.
Bernhard Schneider Assessor
20-Nov-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Short consultation of https://correctiv.org/thema/aktuelles/ makes clear that this organization has regularly been checking news


done_all 1b marked as Fully compliant by Bernhard Schneider.

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.

CORRECTIV.ORG
10-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)

1 Angebliches „Fakevideo“ über die AfD stellt sich als Satire heraus https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2018/09/13/angebliches-fakevideo-ueber-die-afd-stellt-sich-als-satire-heraus/

2 Keine sexuellen Übergriffe auf Anti-Nazi-Konzert https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2018/09/14/keine-sexuellen-uebergriffe-auf-anti-nazi-konzert

3 Tötungsdelikt Chemnitz – Behörden dementieren Gerüchte über sexuelle Belästigung und zweiten Todesfall https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2018/08/28/toetungsdelikt-chemnitz-behoerden-dementieren-geruechte-ueber-sexuelle-belaestigung-und-zweiten-todesfall

4 Auch EU-Ausländer müssen Anspruch auf Kindergeld nachweisen https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2018/08/28/auch-eu-auslaender-muessen-anspruch-auf-kindergeld-nachweisen

5 Nein - es gibt keine EU-Norm für zu große Zucchini https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2018/08/17/nein-es-gibt-keine-eu-norm-fuer-zu-grosse-zucchini

6 Nein - Diese Filmcrew inszeniert kein Ertrinken von Flüchtlingen https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2018/08/16/nein-diese-filmcrew-inszeniert-kein-ertrinken-von-fluechtlingen

7 Wie „Truth 24“ Falschnachrichten über einen Missbrauchsfall in Lebach verbreitet https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2018/08/02/soldaten-angegriffen-nein-alles-frei-erfunden

8 Soldaten angegriffen? Nein – alles frei erfunden https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2018/08/02/soldaten-angegriffen-nein-alles-frei-erfunden

9 Diese Pflanze heilt Krebs nicht in 16 Stunden https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2018/05/02/diese-pflanze-heilt-krebs-nicht-in-16-stunden

10 Nein – Wer eine einzige Wespe tötet muss nicht 50.000 Euro Bußgeld zahlen https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2018/07/24/nein-wer-eine-einzige-wespe-toetet-muss-nicht-50000-euro-bussgeld-zahlen

Even if our organization mostly deals with disinformation about migration in Germany, we focus on covering false informations about the current news but also rumors that can concern topics like health (like cancer healing) or the EU (like the authorized size of zucchinis.)

We’ve been taking care of archiving the links, that were sharing false informations instead of just linking to the sites (and giving them more traffic) or only taking screenshots.

Marco Maas Assessor
25-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)
Criterion empty.
Bernhard Schneider Assessor
20-Nov-2018 (1 year ago)

1 was a satirical video indeed. 2 Claimed harassment turned out to be fake news. 3 Although the link is broken, I could google the case finding out that police and district attorney deny this allegation (as documented with good and credible screenshots). 4. Foreigners for certain must prove they are entitled to receive child benefits. 5 It is the retailers the sale of "too big" zucchinis, not the EU. 6 A great job was done giving evidence that these scenes actually are related to the making of a documentary film. A Czech text was correctly translated. 7 fake news, indeed. 8 Claimants meanwhile have admitted to have presented a fake story to police and media. 9. no facts back the content of this report about alleged progress in medicine. 10: a crazy headline indeed, to be honest, I did not even check this, but can exclude such facts by common sense.


done_all 2a marked as Fully compliant by Bernhard Schneider.

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.

CORRECTIV.ORG
10-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)

We state the IFCN Principles on our about-page https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2018/10/04/unsere-standards

And also stress the point in our mission statement for the factchecking team: https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2018/10/04/correctiv-faktencheck

Also we have an elaborate policy and code of conduct that prohibites us from advocacy and supporting political candidates. https://correctiv.org/redaktionsstatut/


Marco Maas Assessor
25-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)
Criterion empty.
Bernhard Schneider Assessor
20-Nov-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

I have checked the correctness of the links presented in text-box of criterion 2b, finding them working and correctly described, and I have carefully checked the threads on the last Bundestag election, on the gender pay gap in Germany and others, finding no case of preference for any political party or party candidate. Maybe reference to the FDP's campaign describing it as a "yet,but..." campaign was purposefully unfriendly, because not all political positions of FDP were "yes, but" phrases and because it is only logical that any party positioned in the middle between competitors will tend to explain their in-between position in "yes, but"-phrases.


done 2b marked as Partially compliant by Bernhard Schneider.

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.

CORRECTIV.ORG
10-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)

We take care of archiving the links from the websites that publish the false informations, so that the readers can find out what we actually read. During the last months, we have focussed on publishing the emails that our sources send to us, so that readers are sure that we are not misquoting them.

Another thing that we’ve been doing, for example, in articles where verification is needed, is that we explained how we found informations on social media.

Of course we link to every source that is available online, and in case it is not, we will provide screenshots. Example: https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2018/09/13/angebliches-fakevideo-ueber-die-afd-stellt-sich-als-satire-heraus

Marco Maas Assessor
25-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)
Criterion empty.
Bernhard Schneider Assessor
20-Nov-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

I found this true, and the links were working.


done_all 3a marked as Fully compliant by Bernhard Schneider.

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.

CORRECTIV.ORG
10-Oct-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

We publish our funding here: https://correctiv.org/ueber-uns#finanzen-foerderer

As a third-party fact-checker for Facebook, we initially didn’t take any money from the social media company Facebook during the first year of the collaboration. After seeing that the partnership with Facebook was correct (as in: they did not interfere in our work or selection), we decided to be paid by the company for our service of fact-checking and updated our FAQ. Correctiv’s readers can find out that the partnerships involves payment. https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2018/10/04/haeufig-gestellte-fragen

Apart from using Facebook's content list, we also do our own monitoring of potentially false content and send such content to the Facebook-list as well.

Marco Maas Assessor
25-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)
Criterion empty.
Bernhard Schneider Assessor
20-Nov-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

On Correctiv's website, all donations >1000 € are listed as well as salaries of top editors.

It is not enough to find out that Facebook does not interfere, it should have been also checked if they pick up content in a selective or biased manner. For this end, one should check to which cases of banning or deactivation of content etc., Correctiv's reporting has led.


done_all 4a marked as Fully compliant by Bernhard Schneider.

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.

CORRECTIV.ORG
10-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)

The fact checking team is listed here: https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2018/10/04/unser-team

Correctiv also has an ethics and an advisory board: https://correctiv.org/ueber-uns/

Marco Maas Assessor
25-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)
Criterion empty.
Bernhard Schneider Assessor
20-Nov-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

I found out everything to be as it should and as it is announced in criterion 4b.


done_all 4b marked as Fully compliant by Bernhard Schneider.

Criterion 4c
Contact
Evidence required: Please link to the section where readers can get in touch with the organization.

CORRECTIV.ORG
10-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)

https://correctiv.org/kontakt/ to contact the organization. Each author-page lists their Email address.

We also publish our Email address on our Twitter-Account: twitter.com/correctiv_fakt

Marco Maas Assessor
25-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)
Criterion empty.
Bernhard Schneider Assessor
20-Nov-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

I carrtied out a random check of articles and found authors' names and e-mail addresses (directly linking to e-mail software) in all cases. 


done_all 4c marked as Fully compliant by Bernhard Schneider.

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.

CORRECTIV.ORG
10-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)
Marco Maas Assessor
25-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)
Criterion empty.
Bernhard Schneider Assessor
20-Nov-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

The applied methods are transparently explained. I checked whether articles published at Correctiv.org actually do reflect these rules and found out that they do.


done_all 5a marked as Fully compliant by Bernhard Schneider.

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.

CORRECTIV.ORG
10-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)

We encourage our readers to submit links/statements we should check here: https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2017/10/04/kontakt

Marco Maas Assessor
25-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)
Criterion empty.
Bernhard Schneider Assessor
20-Nov-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

The presented link is broken. Nonetheless, Correctiv does encourage internet users to bring own links, stories and statements and even offers an anonymous platform.


done_all 5b marked as Fully compliant by Bernhard Schneider.

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.

CORRECTIV.ORG
10-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)

Our FAQ addresses this question: https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/ueber-uns/2018/10/04/haeufig-gestellte-fragen

Was ist, wenn ich einen Fehler bei Euch entdeckt habe?

Wir korrigieren klar und offen, wenn wir einen Fehler gemacht haben. Fehlermeldungen nehmen wir entgegen per Mail an den faktencheck@correctiv.org.

What if I have discovered a mistake by you?

We correct clearly and openly if we have made a mistake. We accept error messages by mail to faktencheck@correctiv.org.

Marco Maas Assessor
25-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)
Criterion empty.
Bernhard Schneider Assessor
20-Nov-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

The organisation seems to document hints about errors transparently. To fully check this, I would have had to report an error which I did not. I found sufficient evidence reading that correctiv apparently does change content when informed about errors or inexact reporting, explaining all details about the amendment in a separate textbox.


done_all 6a marked as Fully compliant by Bernhard Schneider.

Criterion 6b
Examples of corrections
Evidence required: Please provide two examples of a correction made, or correction requests handled, in the past year.

CORRECTIV.ORG
10-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)

https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2018/06/14/woher-kommt-das-bild-von-den-angeblich-in-russland-fuer-die-wm-getoeteten-hunden

In a first version of this story we had made a mistake by writing that the french press agency AFP had used the image of dead dogs to illustrate its article. We got aware of this mistake by a reader an corrected it, by editing the story and adding an update on it. We also called the magazine Stern that had written an article about our story, so that they would update it.

Also: we realised almost a year after that a fact-check, that had been published by a student during our collaboration with first draft during the german election of September 2017, included many mistakes. We updated the article in June 2018 and marked in red the mistakes and in green the correct facts. https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/artikel-faktencheck/2017/09/18/belasten-tuerkische-angehoerige-unsere-kassen

Marco Maas Assessor
25-Oct-2018 (1 year ago)
Criterion empty.
Bernhard Schneider Assessor
20-Nov-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Two relevant and recent cases were listed as examples.

Remark: If such an unpleasant mistake appears, one should not only ask one paper to reconsider their story but one should investigate whether there were more domestic and foreign media which have taken up the fake information building any news reports on them.


done_all 6b marked as Fully compliant by Bernhard Schneider.