Everyone complains about how social media is full of hoaxes and inaccuracies in the aftermath of a breaking-news event like the shooting down of Malaysian Flight MH17, but we all have the ability to fact-check the news. Here are some resources to do so
PolitiFact wants to bring the same kind of fact-checking it performs on political statements to commentary by radio and TV talk-show hosts, bloggers and newspaper columnists — but is what the new service wants to do even possible?
Truth Teller is a prototype launched by the Washington Post — with funding from the Knight Foundation — that is designed to fact-check political speeches in real time. But can it do this? And will anyone care?
There has been a rush of fact-checking of recent comments made by Republican vice-presidential nominee Paul Ryan, but does this mean the traditional media’s obsession with objectivity and the “view from nowhere” has changed? Not really — which is why more alternative sources are necessary.
As more and more breaking news comes to us through social media, the task of determining what is true and what isn’t becomes exponentially harder. Storyful says that crowdsourcing is the best way to do this, and so it has opened up its professional verification process.
Critics of a Newsweek cover story by historian Niall Ferguson say the piece should never have been published because of the errors and flawed logic it contains. But isn’t it better if those kinds of mistakes are corrected in public view instead of behind closed doors?
New research about how news is verified through Twitter and a crowdsourced debunking of some fake Wikipedia entries reinforce the point that social networks and online communities can be powerful tools for the real-time verification of events, something that used to take place behind closed doors.