Doğruluk Payı

Organization: Doğruluk Payı
Applicant: Batuhan Ersun
Assessor: Erkan Saka
Edits made by the organization after this assessment

IFCN Staff wrote:

We have gone through the assessment, and found out that our funding sources section assessed as incomplete. We did ask our web designers as we submitted the form and it looks like they acted late to update the section.

The link in the application now shows our funding sources.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jIOG2dTAR8IjzNDoq1C9DK6mGN9gkVMvwVtXeamXuZ0/edit?usp=sharing


Conclusion and recommendations
on 23-Aug-2018 (1 year ago)

Erkan Saka wrote:

I believe the re-design of the website caused some problems. For the sake of attractive design and immediacy to reach readers, some vital information is held behind. I believe all the issues can easily be fixed. Especially naming the sources. But of course, it this causes a problem because of the country's political situation, it should be noted. 

on 23-Aug-2018 (1 year ago)

Erkan Saka recommended Accept with edits


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.

Doğruluk Payı
09-Aug-2018 (1 year ago)

Doğruluk Payı is a project of Izlemedeyiz Association (On Watch Association). OW is an officially registered NGO in Turkey. Doğruluk Payı is a registered trademark of the organization and the organization has all the intellectual property.

Files Attached
picture_as_pdf registration documen... (1 MB)
Erkan Saka Assessor
21-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

I have reviewed the attached document and checked its validity through state official websites. All is fine. 


done_all 1a marked as Fully compliant by Erkan Saka.

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.

Doğruluk Payı
09-Aug-2018 (1 year ago)

All of our factchecks are available at www.dogrulukpayi.com

Erkan Saka Assessor
21-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

The applicant continues to publish fact checks in regular bases and all those reports can be found in the link given. 


done_all 1b marked as Fully compliant by Erkan Saka.

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.

Doğruluk Payı
09-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Dogruluk Payi looks through statements on daily basis and editorial board picks statements based on their nature of whether they can be fact-checked or not, and the ratio of political parties/fact-checks, to make sure political parties take place in our fact-checks in a ratio with their representation in Turkish Parliament.

1) Binali Yıldırım - True http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/iddia-kontrolu/binali-yildirim/gecen-sene-ispanya-ile-ticaretimiz-yuzde-19-artti

2) Binali Yıldırım - False http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/iddia-kontrolu/binali-yildirim/bugun-memnuniyet-ve-sevincle-diyorum-ki-kadin-adaylara-en-fazla-yer-veren-parti-ak-parti-dir

3) Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu - True http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/iddia-kontrolu/kemal-kilicdaroglu/2017-de-bir-ayiptan-soz-edeyim-size-1-milyon-897-bin-524-cocugumuz-okullasamadi

4) Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu - False http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/iddia-kontrolu/kemal-kilicdaroglu/buyurun-izmir-e-bakalim-en-buyuk-kent-ormani-izmir-de

5) Devlet Bahçeli - True http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/beyanat/5582b456201eb

6) Devlet Bahçeli - False http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/beyanat/5562c383b93fe

7) Selahattin Demirtaş - True http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/beyanat/560e60f6b37f6

8) Selahattin Demirtaş - False http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/beyanat/56bda43fd84d5

9) Recep Tayyip Erdoğan - True http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/iddia-kontrolu/recep-tayyip-erdogan/tasarruf-tesvik-ve-konut-edindirme-yardimi-odemelerini-kim-gerceklestirdi-biz-gerceklestirdik

10) Recep Tayyip Erdoğan - False http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/iddia-kontrolu/recep-tayyip-erdogan/habitat-2-toplantisinda-sonuc-bildirgesine-bir-sey-kaydedildi-neydi-biliyor-musunuz-dunyanin-en-temiz-sehri-istanbul

Erkan Saka Assessor
21-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

The applicant continues to be one of the fairest websites in this regard in Turkish. Examples given are based on a wide spectrum of political views in Turkey.   


done_all 2a marked as Fully compliant by Erkan Saka.

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.

Doğruluk Payı
09-Aug-2018 (1 year ago)

Our nonpartisanship and fairness policy is available on http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/hakkimizda

Erkan Saka Assessor
21-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Given link does not work. New link is this one: http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/~Hakkimizda

I believe during the website re-design this part has gone. There is a video that explains what the project is about but I could not see an explicit statement in this regard. 


done 2b marked as Partially compliant by Erkan Saka.

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.

Doğruluk Payı
09-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

In every of our fact-check, the resources that we use, including the source of the fact-checked statement, are provided on our website. They are just below the end of our fact-check, and easily accessible. No membership required to see the sources.

We use open and public sources to fact-check the claims. Our primary targets for a source are official statistics. Secondary ones are trustworthy international statistical pages. And if we don't have any info from those primary and secondary sources, we search the trustworthy NGOs' reports as sources.

Erkan Saka Assessor
21-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

I have checked several reports. Sources are listed as explained here. Public explanation can be found here: http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/~Degerlendirme-Kriterleri



done_all 3a marked as Fully compliant by Erkan Saka.

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.

Doğruluk Payı
09-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Our sources of funding are listed on this page of our website: http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/~Hakkimizda

Erkan Saka Assessor
21-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

There is a link to Google Doc that details 2017 budget but does not provide any funding sources. In the given link, I could not see source name, too. 


cancel 4a marked as Non compliant by Erkan Saka.

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.

Doğruluk Payı
09-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

All of our key actors, including our editors and their bios, are on this page of our website: http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/~Hakkimizda

Erkan Saka Assessor
21-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

They are clearly listed and their biographies can be reached by clicking on the names.


done_all 4b marked as Fully compliant by Erkan Saka.

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

Doğruluk Payı
09-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Readers can simply email us from iletisim@dogrulukpayi.com and use our social media accounts. We also provide our all contact lists on this page: http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/~Hakkimizda

Erkan Saka Assessor
21-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

It is easy to find out contact information once the reader reaches the given link (About us page). However, finding the about page may not be easy for many readers. I strongly suggest the link to "Hakkında" should be more visible.


done 4c marked as Partially compliant by Erkan Saka.

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.

Doğruluk Payı
09-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Our methodology is publicly available at http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/~Degerlendirme-Kriterleri

Erkan Saka Assessor
21-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

The methodology is clear and detailed enough. 


done_all 5a marked as Fully compliant by Erkan Saka.

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.

Doğruluk Payı
09-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

We constantly share visuals to call people to send claims to us. We use Facebook and Twitter for these calls all the time. Here are two links that we call our readers to send us fact-checks. https://www.facebook.com/dogrulukpayi/photos/a.1445752049006436.1073741828.1437665699815071/2197025270545773/?type=3&theater https://twitter.com/dogrulukpayicom/status/989094916667203586 Also in our Twitter and Facebook cover photos, we use the same visual that asks our readers to send us claims to fact-check. http://www.facebook.com/dogrulukpayi

Erkan Saka Assessor
21-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Maybe a quick reminder that explains what kind of statements can be analyzed could be added to these calls to readers. 


done_all 5b marked as Fully compliant by Erkan Saka.

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.

Doğruluk Payı
09-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Our correction policy is available at http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/~Degerlendirme-Kriterleri

Erkan Saka Assessor
21-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Policies are listed in the given link. 


done_all 6a marked as Fully compliant by Erkan Saka.

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

Doğruluk Payı
09-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

We had only one example of a correction last year. You can see the related page on here http://www.dogrulukpayi.com/iddia-kontrolu/orhan-saribal/tarimsal-ham-maddede-ithalat-ihracatin-6-katina-ulasti

We can also provide detailed corrections in our social media accounts.

Erkan Saka Assessor
21-Aug-2018 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

I could not get what was corrected exactly. It could be clearer. 


done 6b marked as Partially compliant by Erkan Saka.

Section 7: Eligibility to be a signatory

Criterion 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.

Criterion 1.2
The team, unit or organization is set up exclusively for the purpose of fact-checking.

Criterion 1.3
The applicant has published an average of at least one fact check a week over the course of the three months prior to the date of application.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 1.5
The applicant’s editorial output is not, in the view of the IFCN, controlled by the state, a political party or politician.

Criterion 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.

Section 8: A commitment to Non-partisanship and Fairness

Criterion 2.1
The applicant fact-checks using the same high standards of evidence and judgement for equivalent claims regardless of who made the claim.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.

Section 9: A commitment to Standards and Transparency of Sources

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.

Section 10: A commitment to Transparency of Funding & Organization

Criterion 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).

Criterion 4.2
Applicants that are the fact-checking section or unit of a media house or other parent organization make a statement on ownership.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 4.5
The applicant provides easy means on its website and/or via social media for users to communicate with the editorial team.

Section 11: A commitment to Standards and Transparency of Methodology

Criterion 5.1
The applicant publishes on its website a statement about the methodology it uses to select, research, write and publish its fact checks.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.

Section 12: A commitment to an Open & Honest Corrections Policy

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.

Criterion 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.