Center for Democratic Transition

Organization: Raskrinkavanje.me
Applicant: Milica Bogdanović
Assessor: Ivana Jeremic
Edits made by the organization after this assessment

IFCN Staff wrote:

With all the edits made, I think Raskrinkavanje.me has improved their application and it's now ready to be one of the signatories. It's of great value that such organization exists in Montenegro and the fact it's a joint regional project means a lot in fighting disinformation and fake news. 


Conclusion and recommendations
on 17-Oct-2019 (5 months ago)

Ivana Jeremic wrote:

With all the edits made, I think Raskrinkavanje.me has improved their application and it's now ready to be one of the signatories. It's of great value that such organization exists in Montenegro and the fact it's a joint regional project means a lot in fighting disinformation and fake news. 

on 17-Oct-2019 (5 months ago)

Ivana Jeremic recommended Accept


on 10-Aug-2019 (7 months ago)

Ivana Jeremic wrote:

Raskrinkavanje.me is a partnership project by the Center for Democratic Transition and "Why not" who is also the founder of Raskrinkavanje.ba. First of all, the applicant shouldn't be the Center for Democratic Transition but Raskrinkavanje itself. They haven't been yet registered as an online media organization nor they have a strict policy on the prevention of political involvement. Their methodology is good, but it's basically copy/pasted from Raskrinkavanje.ba and is not always reflecting their writing. I believe that Raskrinkavanje.me has a lot of potentials and is of great value to have such fact-checking project in Montenegro. However, I believe that at this stage they are not ready to get the status of a signatory. Should they be willing to correct the flaws and improve their policy and free their articles of unnecessary comments, I think they would be a great member of IFCN.

on 10-Aug-2019 (7 months ago)

Ivana Jeremic recommended Reject


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.

Raskrinkavanje.me
15-Jul-2019 (8 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

Raskrinkavanje.me is a fact-checking project developed by Center for Democratic Transition (CDT), in the cooperation with the Civic Association "Why not" from Bosnia and Hercegovina. CDT is a legal entity registered in the register of NGOs in Montenegro.The scanned copy of the Decision on the Registration is in the attachment.

Files Attached
picture_as_pdf cdt-rjesenje-osnivan... (176 KB)
Ivana Jeremic Assessor
10-Aug-2019 (7 months ago) Updated: 5 months ago

The applicant is a legally registered NGO in Montenegro and Raskrinkavanje.me is one of their projects exclusively set for fact-checking. Raskrinkavanje.me is a registered media outlet.


done_all 1a marked as Fully compliant by Ivana Jeremic.

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.

Raskrinkavanje.me
15-Jul-2019 (8 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

During the six-month period, our team has analyzed at least 500 articles from around 200 local and regional media outlets. In this initial phase, until we further build capacities, we are monitoring media releases on international policy, defense and security since these are the topics that are the focus of CDT’s work through the Info Center on Euro-Atlantic Integration. In several cases, we have also been monitoring releases of regional media outlets that are very well read in Montenegro. By using our methodology, we have recognized a whole range of media manipulations ranging from “clickbaits” (the title promises content that is not in the article) as “the least serious violation", through disinformation, manipulation of facts, biased reporting, unverified media releases, conspiracy theories to “false news” as “the most serious violation” (media produce completely false information on their own and present it as a fact). 

https://www.raskrinkavanje.me/analize

Ivana Jeremic Assessor
10-Aug-2019 (7 months ago) Updated: 5 months ago

Raskrinkavanje.me has published fact-checks at least once a week in the last three months. They monitor media releases on international policy, defence and security.


done_all 1b marked as Fully compliant by Ivana Jeremic.

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.

Raskrinkavanje.me
15-Jul-2019 (8 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

As we mentioned, through our methodology, we have recognized a whole range of media manipulations ranging from “clickbaits” (the title promises content that is not in the article) as “the least serious violation", through disinformation, manipulation of facts, biased reporting, unverified media releases, conspiracy theories to “false news” as “the most serious violation” (media produce completely false information on their own and present it as a fact). 

All analyzes are available at:

https://www.raskrinkavanje.me/analize

During the last six months, we have analyzed at least 500 articles from across 200 local and regional media outlets. Each article is copied and archived on the website and each media outlet has its profile with all available information https://www.raskrinkavanje.me/mediji

We are publishing a regular fact-checks and occasional topical analysis of media reporting. Having in mind that CDT is a think tank, we are preparing a periodical analysis based on Raskrinkavanje.me's fact-checks. Based on these analysis, Raskrinkavanje.me's team makes recommendations to institutions, media community and civil society for improving media environment. 

Ivana Jeremic Assessor
10-Aug-2019 (7 months ago) Updated: 5 months ago

Raskrinkavanje.me covers a variety of topics, but my impression is that they're missing to check articles and claims published in the mainstream and major Montenegrin and regional media. They cover specific topics with the intention to expand. It's yet to be seen how they will cover once they start monitoring wider topics.


done 2a marked as Partially compliant by Ivana Jeremic.

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.

Raskrinkavanje.me
15-Jul-2019 (8 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

Center for Democratic Transition (CDT) is a non-governmental organization that works to promote democracy embodied in an honest and accountable government, dynamic civil society and active and informed citizens, through developing and fostering public dialogue, training of political actors, advocacy, monitoring of institutions, processes and policies. CDT is member of the European Network of Election Monitoring Organizations (ENEMO) and the Global Network of Election Monitoring Organizations (GNEMO). Nonpartisanship policy as a part of CDT's Statute is available at http://www.en.cdtmn.org/o-nama/akti/

Ivana Jeremic Assessor
10-Aug-2019 (7 months ago) Updated: 5 months ago

The organization provided its Statute, and they have added a new section on the website where they explain it's prohibited for its employees to get involved in any political activities. 


done_all 2b marked as Fully compliant by Ivana Jeremic.

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.

Raskrinkavanje.me
15-Jul-2019 (8 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

Raskrinkavanje.me's team use the same professional methods of journalism as journalists. Each fact-checked analysis has clearly identified sources and links to them wherever available. Also, we upload all relevant documents and photos and/or link to them in the analysis. Our fact checked analysises contain a clear explanation of how each information was obtained and how collected information affects the rating. During the analyzing a media content, our team use the following sources - official data and statistics, responses and data from official institutions, relevant media sources (articles, photos, videos etc.), official statements of relevant persons or institutions, researches of relevant institutions or individuals, experts' opinions,original research conducted by our team members etc. 

Our policy regarding sources is included in the methodology, published on the link below:

https://raskrinkavanje.ba/metodologija

Ivana Jeremic Assessor
10-Aug-2019 (7 months ago)

Sources are provided for the most things in their analysis but sometimes the analysis also has conclusions that are not linked to the sources used for fact-checking. Also, the methodology they've provided is of another separate project and isn't available on their website.


done 3a marked as Partially compliant by Ivana Jeremic.

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.

Raskrinkavanje.me
15-Jul-2019 (8 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

All information about our sources of funding are published under the subtitle "kako se finansiramo"

https://www.raskrinkavanje.me/o-raskrinkavanje-me 

Ivana Jeremic Assessor
10-Aug-2019 (7 months ago) Updated: 5 months ago

Raskrinkavanje.me is founded by CDT and s is funded from the project of its partner NGO "Why Not" from Sarajevo. The details on money spendings are now available on their website.


done_all 4a marked as Fully compliant by Ivana Jeremic.

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.

Raskrinkavanje.me
15-Jul-2019 (8 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

This is also list of the all authors behind our fact-checking project

https://www.raskrinkavanje.me/impressum

Ivana Jeremic Assessor
10-Aug-2019 (7 months ago) Updated: 5 months ago

The list of the team members along with their short biographies are listed on their website. In their edit of the initial application, they've added clear roles of all of their staff. 


done 4b marked as Partially compliant by Ivana Jeremic.

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

Raskrinkavanje.me
15-Jul-2019 (8 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago
Ivana Jeremic Assessor
10-Aug-2019 (7 months ago)

There is the official email which readers can use to reach the organization.


done_all 4c marked as Fully compliant by Ivana Jeremic.

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.

Raskrinkavanje.me
15-Jul-2019 (8 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

Our fact-checking work and detailed methodolody are presented at https://www.raskrinkavanje.me/metodologija

Ivana Jeremic Assessor
10-Aug-2019 (7 months ago)

The methodology provided on their website is a very good step-by-step explanation of how they approach and write fact-checks.


done_all 5a marked as Fully compliant by Ivana Jeremic.

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.

Raskrinkavanje.me
15-Jul-2019 (8 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

Our readers can submit claims to fact-check by using this online form: 

https://www.raskrinkavanje.me/sugestija

Ivana Jeremic Assessor
10-Aug-2019 (7 months ago)

There is a section where readers can submit a link to the problematic article and write a brief explanation.


done_all 5b marked as Fully compliant by Ivana Jeremic.

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.

Raskrinkavanje.me
15-Jul-2019 (8 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

Correction policy is available under the subtitles "ispravka netačnih navoda" https://www.raskrinkavanje.me/o-raskrinkavanje-me

Ivana Jeremic Assessor
10-Aug-2019 (7 months ago) Updated: 5 months ago

Raskrinkavanje.me has a clear corrections policy available on their website.


done_all 6a marked as Fully compliant by Ivana Jeremic.

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

Raskrinkavanje.me
15-Jul-2019 (8 months ago) Updated: 8 months ago

Our platform is lauched in November, 2018 and we haven't yet noticed any example of a correction made or correction requests. 

Ivana Jeremic Assessor
10-Aug-2019 (7 months ago)

The platform has been launched in November 2018 and there haven't been any corrections made in the meantime.


done 6b marked as Partially compliant by Ivana Jeremic.

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.