The IFCN welcomes new applications to its Code of Principles beginning Jan. 16, 2024. Our website is currently under renovation, so new signatories should begin the application process by emailing their interest to info@ifcn.org with "New Signatory" in the subject line.

Källkritikbyrån

Organization: Källkritikbyrån
Applicant: Åsa Larsson
Assessor: Ester Appelgren

Background

This is mostly an application for renewal, but not quite. The three reporters working with Källkritikbyrån are experienced fact-checkers with previous long time experience of being compliant with the criteria of IFCN. There appears however that Källkritikbyrån has been paused during the pandemic, and perhaps therefore, unfortunately I did not find enough fact-checks published on the website (26 fact-checks for a 6 month period). However, my assessment is that this organization truly has the long-time experience of fact-checking and I would recommend that this aspect would not make them un-compliant.  In this case, I do not think there would make any sense to wait for them to produce a few more fact-checks in order to reach compliance, my assessment would not be different.

Assessment Conclusion

There are a few things that I would recommend to change. It would be preferable if Källkritikbyrån could write about their editorial independence in their own words both regarding the cooperation with Facebook and the cooperation with the researchers in the EU funded project. Furthermore the sources of fundings are not stated in detail.

Other than that, yet outside of the IFCN criteria, I would also recommend that Källkritikbyrån could find yet another label for the two different types of fact-checks found in the category "Granskning". See comment in Swedish below.

on 27-Jul-2022 (1 year ago)

Ester Appelgren assesses application as Compliant

A short summary in native publishing language

På det stora hela finner jag att Källkritikbyrån uppfyller IFCN's kriterier, men det finns några saker som behöver förtydligas. Det första gäller två inflytelserika samarbeten, med Facebook och med ett nytt spännande forskningsprojekt. Samarbetet med Facebook genomförs ju delvis via IFCN, men det behöver ändå förtydligas för publiken att Källkritikbyrån är oberoende Facebook när man arbetar redaktionellt. Det samma gäller forskningsprojektet. Även om det är självklart för de inblandade i projektet, behöver det förtydligas så att publiken (som kanske inte vet så mycket om hur samverkansforskning bedrivs) förstår hur Källkritikbyrån fortsätter vara oberoende i samarbetet med medieforskarna.

Genomgången av artiklar i kategorin Granskning resulterade i att det verkar finnas två huvudsakliga underkategorier av granskningar, de där man använder externa källor och belyser olika sidor, och sådana granskningar som mer handlar om att lära publiken hur man själv kan förstå att ett viralt påstående är falskt, tex som i fallet med tävlingar på Facebook. I den senare underkategorin används en tydlig metodik, men den skiljer sig åt från de mer traditionella granskningarna av virala påståenden som också finns i kategorin "Granskning". För tydlighetens skull, vore det bra med en underkategori på sådana granskningar som fungerar mer som guider. Egentligen passar de inte så bra in på på IFCNs kriterier just nu utan en extra underkategori.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago)

We are a legally registered company with the number 559227-6371 at the Swedish Bolagsverket (Swedish Companies Registration Office). We are a factchecking organization and this is apparent on our website here: https://kallkritikbyran.se/om-oss/

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago)

The signatory states on its website that they are a stand-alone organization dedicated to fact-checking.


done_all 1.1 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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?

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

1. The organization Källkritikbyrån started Oct 2019, but it is a continuation of the now cancelled Viralgranskaren. The three founders of Viralgranskaren have founded Källkritikbyrån and that has been covered in Swedish media:

https://sverigestidskrifter.se/publicerar/jag-var-kvar-in-i-det-sista-pa-metro-for-att-forsoka-radda-viralgranskaren/

https://www.dagensmedia.se/medier/dagspress/trion-bakom-viralgranskaren-startar-byra/

https://www.dn.se/kultur-noje/kallkritikbyran-tar-over-jakten-pa-fejk-pa-natet/

Viralgranskaren was started March 2014 and ended with the cancellation of Metro in Aug 2019. We applied for and was accepted as a signatory of IFCN Code of principles twice and would have applied for a third year, but the crisis put a stop to that. We, the three founders of Viralgranskaren, Jack Werner, Linnéa Jonjons and Åsa Larsson, decided to start over and try to save Viralgranskaren and the only way in the end turned out to be to start over with Källkritikbyrån.

2. Åsa Larsson is the only employee in the company and she is editor-in-chief and "ansvarig utgivare" (publisher). The other two founders Jack Werner and Linnéa Jonjons help in different ways, but are not employed in the company.

3. Factchecks, cooperations with other media, lectures and producing guides and helpful tools for the general public to become better at factchecking things. We collaborate with Nordic factcheckers and researchers in The Nordic Observatory for Digital Media and Information Disorder (NORDIS).

4. To keep factchecking the Swedish social media scene and raise awareness of media literacy issues, especially in connection to the election. We will keep working together with factcheckers, both our Nordic neighbors and within the IFCN.

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago)

Källkritikbyrån is a well-known fact-checking organization in Sweden. And it’s three employees (where only one has the status as formally an employee) are experienced journalists with focus on fact-checking.


done_all 1.2 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

This year started out with a lot of vaccine and pandemic related checks, evolving with the public debate in Sweden and the world. The health misinformation has a big impact on society and individuals and is therefore of a big public interest. When Russia invaded Ukraine it became obvious that the public is a bit unused to disinformation pertaining to war and conflict, but everyone quickly learned. Propaganda and wrongful claims on this topic affected us as well, here in Sweden. We think that all factchecks we've done have had an impact on either individuals or society as a whole, where groups spread lies either about each other or about some aspect of life or structures of society. Even the factchecks of scammers trying to vest money out of the gullible show the general principles of media literacy and what can happen to people that can't see through attempts to fool them.

Files Attached
picture_as_pdf Factchecks Källkriti... (69 KB)
Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

During the past six months (8/6-8/1 2022) I find that the applicant has published 22 fact-checks. In the instructions to the assessors, the IFCN has stated that at least 26 fact-checks are needed. I think that Källkritikbyrån should be considered compliant even though they do not meet the threshold.


done_all 1.3 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Källkritikbyrån has been collaborating with the Swedish public service channel Utbildningsradion (UR) during the spring months and created a media literacy program for high school students about the war in Ukraine (https://urplay.se/serie/227152-kallkoll-kriget-i-ukraina) and preparing for an upcoming project for the election this fall, so please feel free to expand the checked period, since we've had to divide our time between doing factchecks and doing the TV-series.

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago)

Since only 22 fact-checks have been published during the last 6 months, my assessment of the topics of these claims are that they are public interest issues. They are viral claims, and even though they might sometimes be very consumer oriented rather than journalistic, they are in the general interest of the public. The topics are mostly revolving around the pandemic, different aspects on the war in Ukraine and aspects concerning Russia, fake competitions, and various aspects around Swedish supermarkets.


done_all 1.4 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

We are not controlled by the state or political parties and have no commercial, financial and/or institutional relationship to government or politicians. We are collaborating with Nordic factcheckers and researchers in The Nordic Observatory for Digital Media and Information Disorder (NORDIS), a project funded by the European Commission. Information about this is posted here on our website: https://kallkritikbyran.se/press/ and under the About us-section.

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago)

My assessment is that Källkritikbyrån is not controlled by the state or any political party.


done_all 1.5 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

In order to preserve the fact-checkers’ editorial independence and impartiality NORDIS work independently of the EU, national authorities and other external entities. This is stated on the Nordis page and linked from our About us-section under the section on Nordis: https://datalab.au.dk/nordis

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago)

On their website, the signatory states that they are part of an EU funded research project. To my knowledge EU-funding does not imply that the funder itself in any way controls the research results produced in the project. From the information that Källkritikbyrån gives of the EU-project, it is however unclear how Källkritikbyrån can maintain their editorial independence in relation to the researchers participating in the project. I am certain their intention is to do so, but there is no statement about this on the signatory's website. This is however not part of the IFCN criteria, but I would recommend the signatory to make sure their editorial independence is at all times met when participating in the project, and it would not hurt to clarify this also on the website at some point when the project has reached some results.


done_all 1.6 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Our model is to check viral claims. We have not, as some other factchecking organizations, focused on factchecking quotes from politicians or powerful people for example. A more statement-oriented style of factchecking would have made more claims easier to categorize into different political camps. Viral claims don't always reflect sides in political issues that clearly and when they do the right wing sphere has a lot more material that goes viral. But we try to pick from all sides.

We use the same methods as standard, we tell the reader where we encountered the claim, whether it's been spread by Swedish users, try to account for how viral the claim is and in which context it's been spread. Then we backtrack it to the source, ask relevant experts about the facts and present them in the article.

We adhere to the code of conduct for journalists in Sweden: https://www.sjf.se/yrkesfragor/yrkesetik/yrkesetiska-regler

And the ethics code for publicists, in English here: http://www.columbia.edu/itc/journalism/j6075/edit/ethiccodes/SWEDEN.html

10 examples:

A new divide is the one about climate and the environment, and both sides find each other ludicrous. We have taken up scornful and incorrect claims on both sides:

https://kallkritikbyran.se/nej-det-star-inte-fuck-you-greta-i-det-har-bilfonstret/

https://kallkritikbyran.se/svajiga-rapporter-om-strandade-elbilar-i-snon/

We've dealt with politicians moving over to fringe ideas and conspiracy theories from different parties:

https://kallkritikbyran.se/lokal-c-politiker-vilseleder-om-covid-19-och-vaccin/

https://kallkritikbyran.se/konspirationsshow-i-usa-sprids-i-svenska-grupper/

And made up quotes targeting different sides on the Swedish political spectrum:

https://kallkritikbyran.se/hogern-vanstern-och-astrid-lindgren-sa-har-har-de-faktiskt-inte-sagt/

We've gone over problematic areas and shown their complexity, such as crime:

https://kallkritikbyran.se/valdtaktsstatistik-och-forbes-listan-det-har-vet-vi/

https://kallkritikbyran.se/tejpas-till-stolpar-och-fornedras-har-ar-bakgrunden-till-bilderna/

We've looked at Russian disinformation, but also when that disinformation has been exaggerated:

https://kallkritikbyran.se/svavande-uppgifter-om-storleken-pa-den-ryska-affischkampanjen/

https://kallkritikbyran.se/sa-ser-ryktesspridningen-om-hotet-fran-ryssland-ut-pa-tiktok/

And when propaganda for the Ukraine side has been twisted to suit the purposes of the sender: 

https://kallkritikbyran.se/nej-svenska-militarflyg-har-inte-dykt-upp-i-ryssland/

2 bonus examples of times when we've gathered a lot of claims of the same variety. It shows the reader that the method can be used over and over. Putting a lot of chain letters, for example, next to each other is revealing and we can all learn to recognize them this way:

https://kallkritikbyran.se/stora-listan-over-kedjebrev-pa-natet/

https://kallkritikbyran.se/har-ar-sanningen-bakom-uttrycken-i-vaccindebatten/

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

My conclusion after the review of 20 fact-checks is that Källkritikbyrån uses a set of different methods to fact-check claims. Yet, the signatorhy is consistent depending on how the type of of fact-check. There are for example many fact-checks of viral claims that are presented more like "guides" than "traditional" fact-checks. This means that in the guide-type fact-checks no sources are usually contacted, rather the article is written like a guide for how the audience themselves can spot that a claim is fake with links to similar articles, should the audience come across a similar viral claim (most common with fake competitions on Facebook). However, there are also a frequent number of fact-checks where multiple expert sources have been contacted and quoted (most common with articles about Ukraine or Russia). In the more "traditional" fact-checks Källlritikbyrån follows another kind of method compared to the guide-type fact-checks. To make it more clear to the audience, a suggestion would be to use even more labels. Now, all fact-checks are labeled as "Granskning".


done_all 2.1 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

There is a clear description on the journalistic principles for how viral claims are selected on the Källkritikbyrån website. The sample articles does not appear to be skewed to anyone side.


done_all 2.2 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

I would not say that the applicant explains interests of their sources. But in my opinion, it would not be journalistically relevant to explain the interest of a scientist that has been contacted as an expert source when explaining the truth behind a viral claim. 


done_all 2.3 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

My assessment of the articles show that the applicant appears to be truly independent. However, there seems to be a very strong connection to Facebook as a platform, see my comment on this matter further below. On the other hand, Källkritikbyrån is specialized in viral claims, and then my assessment is that it would be highly relevant to use Facebook as a primarily platform for claims to fact-check. 


done_all 2.4 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Yes, this policy is clear and easily avaliable on the applicant's website.


done_all 2.5 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Yes, in the more "traditional" fact-checks in my reviewed sample, the applicant uses multiple expert sources such as scientists, authorities and company representatives that are part of a claim, or other experts.


done_all 3.1 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

There are primary sources in the more "traditional" fact-checks. But the more guide-like fact-checks use primarily secondary sources. It seems to be a deliberate choice and I do find it relevant. The only thing would perhaps that this category needs its own label (see previous comment above).


done_all 3.2 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Yes, there are multiple sources in the more "traditional" fact-checks in my reviewed sample.


done_all 3.3 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Yes, the interests of those that publish fake claims are explained thoroughly in the guide-like fact-checks. 


done_all 3.4 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

We are an independent organization.

https://kallkritikbyran.se/om-oss/

Källkritikbyrån
11-Aug-2022 (1 year ago)

We are an independent organization.

https://kallkritikbyran.se/om-oss/

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

The signatory does not have a page on their website detailing each source of funding accounting for 5% or more of total revenue for its previous financial year, instead they do mention their sources of income, yet without details on how much money they have received.


cancel 4.1 marked as Request change by Ester Appelgren.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
12-Aug-2022 (1 year ago)

The signatory now states each source of funding in SEK on their website.


done_all 4.1 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Källkritikbyrån
11-Aug-2022 (1 year ago)
Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Yes, it is clear from the website that the signatory is a stand-alone organization. However, the cooperation with Facebook seems to be quite important for Källkritikbyrån. Because Facebook is an organization with it's own goals that are not journalistic I recommend that this cooperation is described in Källkritikbyrån's own words rather than with a link to a Facebook controlled page. It is important that Källritikbyrån can explain how they maintain editorial independence in the cooperation with Facebook, and I recommend Källkritikbyrån to get inspired by this explanation written by their Danish colleagues: https://www.tjekdet.dk/tjekdet-har-samarbejde-med-facebook-saadan-fungerer-det 


cancel 4.2 marked as Request change by Ester Appelgren.
Ester Appelgren Assessor
12-Aug-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

The signatory explains the cooperation with Facebook on their website, and in their own words.


done_all 4.2 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Källkritikbyrån is a small organization, from the information provided in the About section it is clear how the organization is structured. 


done_all 4.3 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

There are bios for the three journalists, stating their responsibilities and work experience


done_all 4.4 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

On the first page we have a box for tips:

https://kallkritikbyran.se/

And in the bottom of most of the articles we encourage people to send tips:

https://kallkritikbyran.se/nej-de-har-vaderkartorna-ar-inte-ett-bevis-for-klimathysteri/

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Yes, the applicant encourages the audience to communicate with them on many places on the website.


done_all 4.5 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Yes, there is a clear and very accessible description of the methodology.


done_all 5.1 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

The applicant specializes in viral claims and this is very well described on the website. Källkritikbyrån also explains that there are  journalistic principles used when selecting viral claims.


done_all 5.2 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Yes, in the more traditional fact-checks this is done. In the more guide-like checks it is more about how the audience member themselves can be the judge of what is true or not and how to spot a fake claim.


done_all 5.3 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

In the reviewed sample, I did not find any evidence of that there is any inconsistencies in terms of using the same high standards.


done_all 5.4 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Yes, the applicant quotes important actors part of a viral claims and Källkritikbyrån cannot reach a certain source, it states that this source have been contacted without a response.


done_all 5.5 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

We encourage readers to send us claims on our page and in our social media channels, for example this is pinned to our Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/kallkritikbyran/posts/113390343598317

And we continuously remind people that they can send us tips in the bottom of our articles.

We communicate with most of the people who are sending us tips directly, by answering their emails etc. We also outline our reasoning regarding viral stories here:

https://kallkritikbyran.se/var-journalistik/

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Yes, it is very clear that the audience can contact the reporters with suggestions for claims to fact-check, and what to expect.


done_all 5.6 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Yes, the corrections policy is provided under the headline "Vår journalistik" (Our journalism). 


done_all 6.1 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

The policy is extremely short, but clear.


done_all 6.2 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

We have as of yet not received a corrections request with Källkritikbyrån. However we've updated several articles with information and regarding new developments, for example in these: 

https://kallkritikbyran.se/nej-svenska-militarflyg-har-inte-dykt-upp-i-ryssland/

https://kallkritikbyran.se/sa-ser-ryktesspridningen-om-hotet-fran-ryssland-ut-pa-tiktok/

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

When a correction (or as with the current status of Källkritikbyrån) an update is made, it is visible at the bottom of the page in italics and with a date. 


done_all 6.3 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago
Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

Yes, in the About section, there is a clear instruction on what link to follow if an audience member wants to report the signatory for violating the IFCN code. 


done_all 6.4 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.

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.

Källkritikbyrån
08-Jun-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

We are not.

Ester Appelgren Assessor
25-Jul-2022 (1 year ago) Updated: 1 year ago

The signatory is a stand-alone organization.


done_all 6.5 marked as Compliant by Ester Appelgren.