Peter Cunliffe-Jones COMMENT: Now you can check the fact-checkers

Who checks the fact-checkers? Africa Check has signed up to the International Fact-Checking Network's code of principles. This enables you to judge our commitment to non-partisanship, transparency and honest corrections.

It was close to the end of a two-day gathering in Argentina of the world’s leading fact-checking organisations, when, in one corner of the room, the conversation turned to referees’ role in football.

More specifically, it turned to the accusations of bias that so often follow those who referee the “beautiful game”, as followers such as myself like to call it.

Partisans in a crowd always do, and always will question those who referee a match. So is there anything that we fact-checking organisations could learn from what referees do in refereeing public debate?

The answer we agreed was to establish our version of the referee’s rulebook, a fact-checkers’ code of principles, that we could all sign up to. And in doing so, create a mechanism to allow you, our readers, to judge our performance by those standards.

Partisan groups hijack fact-checking

The sort of independent fact-checking that organisations such as Politifact in the United States, Chequeado in Argentina, Full Fact in the UK and Africa Check all do is still a relatively new phenomenon in journalism.

And as the number of genuinely independent non-partisan fact-checking organisations has grown in recent years, so various partisan and special-interest groups have started hijacking the term, giving an appearance of impartiality to their more selective interpretations of current affairs.

The question of how we should operate, and how our own work should be policed, is thus an important one.

(It is also a very old one. In July 2015, the premier of South Africa’s Western Cape province, Helen Zille, turned to the question posed in the 2nd century AD by Roman poet Juvenal to ask: “Quis custodiet ipsos custodies?” Or: “Who guards the guardians”?)

Code of principles adopted

To start to answer that question, 35 fact-checking organisations from around the world – including Africa Check – signed up to a code of principles last week. We are committing ourselves to:

  • Non-partisanship and fairness,
  • Transparency about sources,
  • Transparency about funding and organisation,
  • Transparency about methodology, and
  • Open and honest corrections.

In a series of calls over the past three months, I joined half a dozen senior fact-checking colleagues around the world to agree how to make this work.

What do we mean by non-partisanship and fairness? How can that be measured? Can fact-checkers who work under authoritarian regimes commit to transparency about the sources they quote? Above all, how can we ensure that you, our readers, can judge our work against these standards, and hold us to account?

The answers to the first questions are set out in the text beneath each of the five principles.

Who checks the fact-checkers?

The key, though, to making this work, is the mechanism explained at the foot of the page which will enable you to hold us to account.

As it says, each of the 35 organisations signing up to the code so far have agreed, by doing so, to produce – within a year of the code’s launch on 15 September 2016, a public report “indicating how they have lived up to each of the five principles” and to repeat this once a year thereafter.

For Africa Check, this report will be displayed on our website, and also on the website of the International Fact-Checking Network. And it will, as the IFCN says “allow readers and others to judge to what extent the fact-checker is respecting the code of principles.”

As a football follower myself, I know that having a clear rulebook helps everyone understand what is going on in the game.

Opening ourselves up to scrutiny like this will also hopefully help to answer the question first posed by Roman poet Juvenal. Who guards the guardians? Now more than ever, you do.

Peter Cunliffe-Jones is the Executive Director of Africa Check. 

© Copyright Africa Check 2016. You may reproduce this report or content from it for the purpose of reporting and/or discussing news and current events, subject to providing a credit to "Africa Check a non-partisan organisation which promotes accuracy in public debate and the media. Twitter @AfricaCheck and www.africacheck.org".

Comment on this report

Comments 1
  1. By Business Model

    Hi Peter,

    Congrats to Africa Check on joining the International Fact-Checking Network. This code of principles now holds Africa Check to higher standards, which is really encouraging and a great business model to follow. This shows how much you value your readers.

    Congrats again,
    Dennis

    +1
    0
    vote

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Africa Check encourages frank, open, inclusive discussion of the topics raised on the website. To ensure the discussion meets these aims we have established some simple House Rules for contributions. Any contributions that violate the rules may be removed by the moderator.

Contributions must:

  • Relate to the topic of the report or post
  • Be written mainly in English

Contributions may not:

  • Contain defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or harassing language or material;
  • Encourage or constitute conduct which is unlawful;
  • Contain material in respect of which another party holds the rights, where such rights have not be cleared by you;
  • Contain personal information about you or others that might put anyone at risk;
  • Contain unsuitable URLs;
  • Constitute junk mail or unauthorised advertising;
  • Be submitted repeatedly as comments on the same report or post;

By making any contribution you agree that, in addition to these House Rules, you shall be bound by Africa Check's Terms and Conditions of use which can be accessed on the website.

*