Demagog Association

Organization: Demagog Association
Applicant: Pawel Terpilowski
Assessor: Grzegorz Piechota

Background

Having reviewed thoroughly the Demagog Association's application, documents and fact checks, I have concluded that the applicant is fully compliant with the IFCN Code of Principles.

I reviewed the Demagog Association's application for the second time. I noticed the applicant improved in areas that I pointed out as short-comings in the previous assessment. For example, the correction policy includes now clear revision timeframe. The revised fact-checks are now clearly labeled and located in a separate section on their website.

Assessment Conclusion

I would like to recommend the IFCN Board to accept their application. 

The Demagog Association is a professional non-profit watchdog organisation. During the evaluation of their policies and practices, I read dozens of their documents and fact checks, and I found they met the highest standards of quality and impartiality. 

In Polish context, an increasingly polarised and polluted public debate, the fact checking service that the applicant provides advances understanding and decision-making by the public. 

I would like also to praise their efforts to educate the public, including children and youth on their methodology.

on 02-Sep-2020 (7 months ago)

Grzegorz Piechota assesses application as Compliant

A short summary in native publishing language

Stowarzyszenie Demagog jest godną zaufania organizacją fact-checkingową w Polsce. Z pasją i zaangażowaniem dostarcza obywatelom bezstronnej i wiarygodnej informacji, przyczyniając się do poprawy jakości debaty publicznej.

Section 1: Eligibility to be a signatory

To be eligible to be a signatory, applicants must meet these six criteria

  • 1.1 The applicant is a legally registered organization, or a distinct team or unit within a legally registered organization, and details of this are easily found on its website.
  • 1.2 The team, unit or organization is set up exclusively for the purpose of fact-checking.
  • 1.3 The applicant has published an average of at least one fact check a week over the course of the six months prior to the date of application. For applicants from countries with at least 5 or more verified signatories need to have at least a fact check a week over the twelve months of publishing track. Consult to factchecknet@poynter.org for confirmation.
  • 1.4 On average, at least 75% of the applicant’s fact checks focus on claims related to issues that, in the view of the IFCN, relate to or could have an impact on the welfare or well-being of individuals, the general public or society.
  • 1.5 The applicant’s editorial output is not, in the view of the IFCN, controlled by the state, a political party or politician.
  • 1.6 If the organization receives funding from local or foreign state or political sources, it provides a statement on its site setting out to the satisfaction of the IFCN, how it ensures its funders do not influence the findings of its reports.

Criteria 1.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please explain where on your website you set out information about your organization’s legal status and how this complies with criteria. Attach a link to the relevant page of your website.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago)

We are registered in legal form of association. Our statute as well as financial reports are published here: https://demagog.org.pl/stowarzyszenie-demagog-pierwsza-w-polsce-organizacja-factcheckingowa/

Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

The applicant is a legally registered organisation. All necessary information is published on their website.


done_all 1.1 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 1.2
Proof you meet criteria
Please answer the following questions – (see notes in Guidelines for Application on how to answer)

 1. When and why was your fact-checking operation started?
 2. How many people work or volunteer in the organization and what are their roles?
 3. What different activities does your organization carry out?
 4. What are the goals of your fact-checking operation over the coming year?

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

1. Our fact-checking activity started in 2014 before European Parliament elections and we were registered as an association two years later in 2016. 

2. Our staff is listed here: https://demagog.org.pl/poznaj-zespol-demagoga/ Right now we have approximately 10 people working in Demagog, mostly on a part-time basis who are accompanied by the team of 10-15 volunteers.

3. Apart from fact-checking claims of politicians we are also tracking their promises and debunking fake news as a partner of Facebook's fact-checking program. We are active in educational sphere - our project Academy of Fact-Checking includes workshops, lessons and webinars for school students, teachers and recently - also elderly. Recently, we have launched our e-learning platform https://kursy.demagog.org.pl

4. We want to expand our reach and number of fact-checks while improving quality of our work.

Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

Applicant's answers and their website provide necessary information regarding history of the association, number and roles of their staff, a range of activities that Demagog is engaged with as well as goals of their fact-checking practice. Demagog association was set up exclusively for the purpose of fact-checking.


done_all 1.2 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 1.3
Proof you meet criteria
- The applicant has published an average of at least one fact check a week over the course of the six months prior to the date of application.
- For applicants from countries with at least 5 or more verified signatories need to have at least a fact check a week over the twelve months of publishing track.
- Consult to factchecknet@poynter.org for confirmation.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Our fact-checks are listed here: https://demagog.org.pl/wypowiedzi/

Our fake news debunks are listed here: https://demagog.org.pl/tematy/fake-news/

Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

I have reviewed fact checks published from March to August 2020. I found there were many more than one fact check published per week -- between 10 and 17 fact checks per week. A range of the total number of fact checks was from 41 in August to 68 in April.


done_all 1.3 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 1.4
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will assess compliance through a review of the fact checks published over the previous three months. No additional information required.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

Our fact-checks are listed here: https://demagog.org.pl/wypowiedzi/

Our fake news debunks are listed here: https://demagog.org.pl/tematy/fake-news/

Over the last three months we were focusing primarily on COVID-19 misinformation as a member of CoronaVirus Facts Alliance. In the context of recent presidential elections, we have fact-checked claims of candidates and debunked various fake news targeted at them.

Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

Based on my review, the majority of fact checks focused on issues that have had an impact on welfare of individuals, general public and society. During the last 6 months, the most frequent topics were verification of facts about the COVID 19 pandemic and Polish presidential elections. 


done_all 1.4 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 1.5
Proof you meet criteria
Please explain any commercial, financial and/or institutional relationship your organization has to the state, politicians or political parties in the country or countries you cover. Also explain funding or support received from foreign as well as local state or political actors over the previous financial year.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

Our funding is explained here: https://demagog.org.pl/finansowanie-i-majatek-stowarzyszenia-demagog/ We publish yearly financial reports and provide information on each grant that we receive - period, funds and activities that will be financed by it.

Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

The applicant is transparent about all major sources of funding. On its website, it published information about the major donors that include state actors. The website features also financial reports for the past few years, including 2019. Based on these sources, I can see that Polish and US state-related funding is a substantial source of revenue, although -- per the assessor's judgment -- it does not  influence the editorial independence of the applicant.


done_all 1.5 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 1.6
Proof you meet criteria
If you confirmed the organization receives funding from local or foreign state or political sources, provide a link to where on your website you set out how you ensure the editorial independence of your work.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

In the past few years, the applicant received grants from the US State Department and the National Freedom Institute that is a Polish governmental agency distributing funding to the non-profit sector. 

The applicant's website describes the purpose of the funding and includes an information about internal policies that guarantee editorial independence.


done_all 1.6 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Section 2: A commitment to Non-partisanship and Fairness

To be compliant on nonpartisanship and fairness, applicants must meet these five criteria

  • 2.1 The applicant fact-checks using the same high standards of evidence and judgement for equivalent claims regardless of who made the claim.
  • 2.2 The applicant does not unduly concentrate its fact-checking on any one side, considers the reach and importance of claims it selects to check and publishes a short statement on its website to set out how it selects claims to check.
  • 2.3 The applicant discloses in its fact checks relevant interests of the sources it quotes where the reader might reasonably conclude those interests could influence the accuracy of the evidence provided. It also discloses in its fact checks any commercial or other such relationships it has that a member of the public might reasonably conclude could influence the findings of the fact check.
  • 2.4 The applicant is not as an organization affiliated with nor declares or shows support for any party, any politician or political candidate, nor does it advocate for or against any policy positions on any issues save for transparency and accuracy in public debate.
  • 2.5 The applicant sets out its policy on non-partisanship for staff on its site. Save for the issues of accuracy and transparency, the applicant’s staff do not get involved in advocacy or publicise their views on policy issues the organization might fact check in such a way as might lead a reasonable member of the public to see the organization’s work as biased.

Criteria 2.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please share links to 10 fact checks published over the past year that you believe demonstrate your non-partisanship.
Please briefly explain how the fact checks selected show that (I) you use the same high standards of evidence for equivalent claims, (II) follow the same essential process for every fact check and (III) let the evidence dictate your conclusions.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

Over the last six months we were covering Polish presidential campaign and impartial fact-checking claims of the candidates was our top priority. Here are some  of the fact-checks of top 3 candidates from 1st round of elections:


Andrzej Duda's truth: https://demagog.org.pl/wypowiedzi/andrzej-duda-o-debatach-prezydenckich/

Andrzej Duda's false: https://demagog.org.pl/wypowiedzi/czy-od-2015-r-bezrobocie-spadlo-o-polowe/

Andrzej Duda's manipulation: https://demagog.org.pl/wypowiedzi/czy-wedlug-tk-platforma-obywatelska-wybrala-sedziow-do-trybunalu-z-naruszeniem-konstytucji/

Rafał Trzaskowski's truth: https://demagog.org.pl/wypowiedzi/jaka-jest-obecna-liczba-osob-bezrobotnych-w-polsce/

Rafał Trzaskowski's false: https://demagog.org.pl/wypowiedzi/ktory-z-kandydatow-jako-pierwszy-zaapelowal-o-przelozenie-wyborow-prezydenckich/

Rafał Trzaskowski's manipulation: https://demagog.org.pl/wypowiedzi/czy-wydatki-na-kancelarie-prezydenta-i-premiera-wzrosly-za-obecnych-rzadow-dwukrotnie/

Rafał Trzaskowski's unverifiable: https://demagog.org.pl/wypowiedzi/ile-osob-pracuje-w-przemysle-futrzarskim-w-polsce/

Szymon Hołownia's truth: https://demagog.org.pl/wypowiedzi/czy-w-ciagu-ostatnich-30-lat-wyemitowalismy-tyle-gazow-co-ludzkosc-przed-nami/

Szymon Hołownia's false: https://demagog.org.pl/wypowiedzi/ile-wody-przypada-srednio-rocznie-na-jednego-mieszkanca-w-polsce-i-egipcie/

Szymon Hołownia's manipulation: https://demagog.org.pl/wypowiedzi/czy-polska-placi-za-jeden-mysliwiec-f-35-wiecej-niz-dania/

Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

The examples provided by Demagog.org and my own review of the fact checks published in the past six months proved that the applicant used the same high standards of evidence and judgment for equivalent claims regardless of who made the claim. 

The particular examples provided by the applicant showed the fact checks of claims made by main candidates in the presidential elections, both conservative and liberal.


done_all 2.1 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 2.2
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to a place on your website where you explain how you select claims to check, explaining how you ensure you do not unduly concentrate your fact-checking on any one side, and how you consider the reach and importance of the claims you select to check.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

Demagog.org published a statement on their website with the explanation about how they select claims to check. 

It is a qualitative selection process based on the recorded sources of statements made by public figures. The applicant also invited readers or members of the public to send them claims worth checking.


done_all 2.2 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 2.3
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will assess compliance through a review of the fact checks published over the previous year. No additional information required.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

We have reviewed 20 different fact checks published between February and August 2020, and we found all of them were compliant with the IFCN code.


done_all 2.3 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 2.4
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will assess compliance through a review of the fact checks published over the previous year. No additional information required.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

Based on the review of 20 different fact checks published in between February and August 2020, as well as the review of internal standards and policies available at Demagog.org.pl website, I found the applicant impartial and having not advocated for or against any policy position on any issue.


done_all 2.4 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 2.5
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to a place on your website where you publish a statement setting out your policy on non-partisanship for staff and how it ensures the organization meets this criteria.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

Upon joining, each member of Demagog has to sign the Declaration of Neutrality, which clearly states importance of non-partisanship in our fact-checking work: https://demagog.org.pl/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Deklaracja-bezstronnosci-Stowarzyszenia-Demagog.pdf There is a section for describing all activities such as work in NGOs and any political involvement for the course of last 5 years that is evaluated by Demagog's board for any potential conflict of interest or threat to impartiality.


Our core principles are described here: https://demagog.org.pl/stowarzyszenie-demagog-pierwsza-w-polsce-organizacja-factcheckingowa/

Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

The applicant set out its policy on non-partisanship for staff on its website. Upon joining, each member of Demagog association had to sign the Declaration of Neutrality, which clearly stated the importance of non-partisanship in their fact-checking work. In this document, there is also a section requiring from the candidates to describe all activities, such as work in the non profit sector or any political engagement for the course of past 5 years. These statements are said to be evaluated by the Demagog's board for any potential conflict of interest or threat to impartiality.


done_all 2.5 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Section 3: A commitment to Standards and Transparency of Sources

To be compliant on sources, applicants must meet these four criteria

  • 3.1 The applicant identifies the source of all significant evidence used in their fact checks, providing relevant links where the source is available online, in such a way that users can replicate their work if they wish. In cases where identifying the source would compromise the source’s personal security, the applicant provides as much detail as compatible with the source’s safety.
  • 3.2 The applicant uses the best available primary, not secondary, sources of evidence wherever suitable primary sources are available. Where suitable primary sources are not available, the applicant explains the use of a secondary source.
  • 3.3 The applicant checks all key elements of claims against more than one named source of evidence save where the one source is the only source relevant on the topic.
  • 3.4 The applicant 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.

Criteria 3.1
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the applicant’s use of sources in a randomised sample of its fact checks to assess compliance. No additional evidence is required.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

The review of fact checks published in between February and August 2020 showed the applicant identified sources of all significant evidence used in the fact checks. Its authors provided relevant links where the source was available online. Readers could easily replicate their work if they wished. 


done_all 3.1 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 3.2
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the applicant’s use of sources in a randomised sample of its fact checks to assess compliance. No additional evidence is required.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

In my review, I found the applicant using the best available primary, and not secondary, sources of evidence wherever suitable primary sources were available. 

Where suitable primary sources were not available, the applicant explained the use of a secondary source.

For example, when fact checking claims about foreign protests of COVID sceptics, it verified pictures and confirmed the reports with first-hand data from foreign police departments.


done_all 3.2 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 3.3
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the applicant’s use of sources in a randomised sample of its fact checks to assess compliance. No additional evidence is required.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

In my review, I found the applicant checking all key elements of claims agains more than one named source of evidence.

For example, in the fact checks about GDP growth in Poland it verified the government' s claims with data from  Eurostat and OECD, foreign and independent providers of data about the Polish economy. 


done_all 3.3 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 3.4
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the applicant’s use of sources in a randomised sample of its fact checks to assess compliance. No additional evidence is required.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

In my review, I found the applicant identified in its fact checks the relevant interests of the sources it used where the reader might reasonably concluded those interests could influence the accuracy of the evidence provided.

For example, when verifying claims about the LGBT community, it used evidence provided by the community's associations noting their interest in the subject.


done_all 3.4 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Section 4: A commitment to Transparency of Funding & Organization

To be compliant on funding and organization, applicants must meet these five criteria

  • 4.1 Applicants that are independent organizations have a page on their website detailing each source of funding accounting for 5% or more of total revenue for its previous financial year. This page also sets out the legal form in which the organization is registered (e.g. as a non-profit, as a company etc).
  • 4.2 Applicants that are the fact-checking section or unit of a media house or other parent organization make a statement on ownership.
  • 4.3 A statement on the applicant’s website sets out the applicant’s organizational structure and makes clear how and by whom editorial control is exercised.
  • 4.4 A page on the applicant’s website details the professional biography of all those who, according to the organizational structure and play a significant part in its editorial output.
  • 4.5 The applicant provides easy means on its website and/or via social media for users to communicate with the editorial team.

Criteria 4.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please confirm whether you are an ‘independent organization’
or ‘the fact-checking section or unit of a media house or other parent organization’ and share proof of this organizational status.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

Documents provided on the website prove that the Demagog Association is an independent organisation. All necessary evidence about the organisation status is available on the its website.


done_all 4.1 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 4.2
Proof you meet criteria
If your organization is an “independent organization”, please share a link to the page on your website where you detail your funding and indicate the legal form in which the organization is registered (e.g. as a non-profit, as a company etc).
If your organization is “the fact-checking section or unit of a media house or other parent organization”, please share a link to the statement on your website about your ownership.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

The Demagog Association is an independent organization. All necessary information about its legal form and details of its funding sources are available on its website.


done_all 4.2 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 4.3
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to where on your website you set out your organizational structure, making clear how and by whom editorial control is exercised.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

Our organizational structure is described here: https://demagog.org.pl/poznaj-zespol-demagoga/

Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

All necessary information about its organisational structure and who exercises editorial control are available on its website.


done_all 4.3 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 4.4
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to where on your website you set out the professional biographies of those who play a significant part in your organization’s editorial output.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

Our organizational structure is described here: https://demagog.org.pl/poznaj-zespol-demagoga/

Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

All necessary information about professional biographies of the editorial team and its organisational structure is available on its website.


done_all 4.4 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 4.5
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to where on your website you encourage users to communicate with your editorial team.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

We encourage to submit claims ad potential misinformation via our form: https://demagog.org.pl/zglos-do-weryfikacji/

For ordinary communication: https://demagog.org.pl/kontakt-demagog/

Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

My review finds the applicant encourages to submit claims regarding potential misinformation as well as provides contact details for other reasons.


done_all 4.5 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Section 5: A commitment to Standards and Transparency of Methodology

To be compliant on methodology, applicants must meet these six criteria

  • 5.1 The applicant publishes on its website a statement about the methodology it uses to select, research, write and publish its fact checks.
  • 5.2 The applicant selects claims to check based primarily on the reach and importance of the claims, and where possible explains the reason for choosing the claim to check.
  • 5.3 The applicant sets out in its fact checks relevant evidence that appears to support the claim as well as relevant evidence that appears to undermine it.
  • 5.4 The applicant in its fact checks assesses the merits of the evidence found using the same high standards applied to evidence on equivalent claims, regardless of who made the claim.
  • 5.5 The applicant seeks where possible to contact those who made the claim to seek supporting evidence, noting that (I) this is often not possible with online claims, (II) if the person who makes the claim fails to reply in a timely way this should not impede the fact check, (III) if a speaker adds caveats to the claim, the fact-checker should be free to continue with checking the original claim, (IV) fact-checkers may not wish to contact the person who made the claim for safety or other legitimate reasons.
  • 5.6 The applicant 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.

Criteria 5.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please provide a link to the statement on your website that explains the methodology you use to select, research, write and publish your fact checks.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

I confirmed the applicant published on its website a comprehensive statement about the methodology it used to select, research, write and publish its fact checks.


done_all 5.1 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 5.2
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the methodology used in a randomised sample of your fact checks to assess compliance with these criteria. No additional evidence is required.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

Based on the sample review, I found that the applicant chose important claims from sources with substantial reach (national news media, social media, scripts from parliamentary sessions, etc). Each fact check was categorised for easier search. The applicant often explained the importance of a claimant or an impact of her claim as a reason to choose the claim to be fact checked.


done_all 5.2 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 5.3
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the methodology used in a randomised sample of your fact checks to assess compliance with these criteria. No additional evidence is required.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

Based on the sample review, I found that the applicant used relevant evidences for supporting and for undermining checked information.

For example, the applicant often used primary sources such as scientific research, data from renowned research institutions, or legal documents.


done_all 5.3 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 5.4
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the methodology used in a randomised sample of your fact checks to assess compliance with these criteria. No additional evidence is required.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

Bases on the sample review, I found the applicant in its fact checks assessed the merits of the evidence found using the same high standards applied to evidence on equivalent claims, regardless of who made the claim.


done_all 5.4 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 5.5
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the methodology used in a randomised sample of your fact checks to assess compliance with these criteria. No additional evidence is required.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

Based on the sample review, I found that the applicant was seeking for supportive evidence, for example, it asked questions to experts in the field, or asked for additional evidence from the relevant sources. 


done_all 5.5 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 5.6
Proof you meet criteria
Please describe how you encourage 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. Include links where appropriate. If you do not allow this, explain why.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

With our submissions form we communicate with users about the exact nature ot their claim or misinformative content. We can explain them why this particular piece wasn't fact-checkable. https://demagog.org.pl/zglos-do-weryfikacji/

Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

I found the applicant encouraging readers to send claims to check. They made it clear what can be fact-checked and what isn’t fact-checkable.


done_all 5.6 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Section 6: A commitment to an Open & Honest Corrections Policy

To be compliant on corrections policy, applicants must meet these five criteria

  • 6.1 The applicant has a corrections or complaints policy that is easily visible and accessible on the organization’s website or frequently referenced in broadcasts.
  • 6.2 The policy sets out clear definitions of what it does and does not cover, how major mistakes, especially those requiring revised conclusions of a fact check, are handled, and the fact that some complaints may justify no response. This policy is adhered to scrupulously.
  • 6.3 Where credible evidence is provided that the applicant has made a mistake worthy of correction, the applicant makes a correction openly and transparently, seeking as far as possible to ensure that users of the original see the correction and the corrected version.
  • 6.4 The applicant, if an existing signatory, should either on its corrections/complaints page or on the page where it declares itself an IFCN signatory inform users that if they believe the signatory is violating the IFCN Code, they may inform the IFCN, with a link to the IFCN site.
  • 6.5 If the applicant is the fact-checking unit of a media company, it is a requirement of signatory status that the parent media company has and adheres to an open and honest corrections policy.

Criteria 6.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please provide a link to where you publish on your website your corrections or complaints policy. If you are primarily a broadcaster, please provide evidence you frequently reference your corrections policy in broadcasts.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

All of our corrections are listed here: https://demagog.org.pl/tematy/korekty/ We have implemented this in accordance to the previous year's assessment.


Our corrections policy is explained here: https://demagog.org.pl/nasza-metodologia-jak-weryfikujemy-wypowiedzi/

Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

I found the applicant's corrections and complaints policy easily visible and accessible on the website. 


done_all 6.1 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 6.2
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the corrections policy to verify it meets critera. No additional information needed.

Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

The applicant's corrections policy described how corrections were handled (by whom, time frame).


done_all 6.2 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 6.3
Proof you meet criteria
Please provide a short statement about how the policy was adhered to over the previous year (or six months if this is the first application) including evidence of two examples of the responses provided by the applicant to a correction request over the previous year. Where no correction request has been made in the previous year, you must state this in your application, which will be publicly available in the assessment if your application is successful.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

https://demagog.org.pl/wypowiedzi/czy-polacy-sa-jednym-z-najbardziej-prounijnych-spoleczenstw/

We have rated as false claim that Poles are one of the most pro-EU nations in Europe. We have based our fact-check on the newest survey made by Eurobarometer which placed Poles in the middle of the pack. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/pdf/eurobarometre/2019/parlemeter-2019-heeding-the-call-beyond-the-vote/report/en-report.pdf

Afterwards, we have received requests to double-check this on the basis of another source, European Social Survey. We learned that the survey, although published in June 2020, was conducted in late 2018 / early 2019, which was chronologically before the Eurobarometer survey, from October 2019. As per our methodology, we use the most recent data available so we maintained our rating.

https://demagog.org.pl/wypowiedzi/ktory-z-polskich-prezydentow-zglosil-najwiecej-projektow-ustaw/

We have rated as true claim that Andrzej Duda submitted the most law initiatives of all of the Polish presidents. We had to check it manually and as it turned out, we didn't find all of initiatives which were submitted by Lech Wałęsa. This was pointed out by one of our readers. After cross-checking this information, we updated the fact-check and changed the rating to false.



Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

The applicant provided evidence of corrections published in the past year. They were done according to the requirements -- openly, transparently, seeking as far as possible to ensure that users see the correction and the corrected version. 


done_all 6.3 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 6.4
Proof you meet criteria
If you are an existing signatory, please provide a link to show where on your site you inform users that if they believe you are violating the IFCN Code, they may inform the IFCN of this, with a link to the complaints page on the IFCN site.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

The applicant declared itself an IFCN signatory and informed readers that if they believed the signatory was violating the IFCN Code, they might inform the IFCN. The link to the IFCN site was provided.


done_all 6.4 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.

Criteria 6.5
Proof you meet criteria
If you are the fact-checking unit of a media company, please provide a link to the parent media company’s honest and open corrections policy and provide evidence that it adheres to this.

Demagog Association
16-Jul-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

We are independent organization. Our corrections policy is explained here: https://demagog.org.pl/nasza-metodologia-jak-weryfikujemy-wypowiedzi/

Grzegorz Piechota Assessor
06-Aug-2020 (8 months ago) Updated: 7 months ago

Based on the formal documents available on the website, the Demagog Association is not a unit of a media company.


done_all 6.5 marked as Compliant by Grzegorz Piechota.