PressOne.PH believes that fact-checking is essential to combatting misinformation and disinformation, and in informing and educating citizens and voters. PressOne.PH commits to be fair and nonpartisan in its fact-checking work and relies on objective criteria in selecting which claims to fact-check – primarily the importance or gravity of the claim and how wide it has been circulated. Fact-checks must explain how the claim was selected. As a policy, PressOne.PH will not link back to erroneous or misleading content to avoid further harm to the public.
PressOne.PH commits to transparency in its fact-checks and endeavors to cite all its sources of information or evidence. Evidence from all relevant sides must be obtained and carefully evaluated. The sources of claims must be contacted if possible (unless there is a legitimate reason otherwise) and allowed to provide evidence to support claims within a reasonable period (48 hours). The absence of a timely reply or any qualification to the original claim will not impede the publication of fact-check pieces.
Fact-checkers must disclose political, economic or other interests of sources quoted in fact-check pieces in cases where conflicts of interest might arise, and especially if these influence any conclusions made. Fact-checkers must not support politicians or political parties or engage in advocacy, especially policy advocacy, that might become the subject of fact-checking, to avoid actual or perceived biases.
In the interim, PressOne.PH is adopting the ratings options for third-party fact-checkers developed by Facebook:
- FALSE: Content that has no basis in fact. This includes:
Claims that are impossible, or that could not be considered an interpretation of something that actually happened or was said
Ex: claim that a natural disaster took place, when no such event happened
Ex: claim that an individual created or patented something when they did not
Conspiracy theories that explain events as the secret work of individuals or groups, which may cite true or unverifiable information but present an implausible conclusion
Ex: claim a company is secretly engaged in drug trafficking based on an unrelated issue of charging high prices
Ex: claim without evidence that government insiders are directly responsible for a terror attack to provide a pretext for going to war
Fabricated content from websites misrepresenting themselves as real news outlets
Image, audio, or video content that is authentic but offered as proof of a separate event (i.e., false context)
Ex: authentic photo claiming to show no damage in a town after an incident, but that actually was taken before the incident
Ex: authentic video claiming to show one person confessing to a crime, but that actually is of another person
Ex: presenting an authentic but old government ordinance as if it were current, when a new ordinance contradicts the old
- ALTERED. Image, audio, or video content that has been edited or synthesized beyond adjustments for clarity or quality, in ways that could mislead people. This definition includes splicing, but not media excerpts or taking media out of context. Under our Community Standards, we also remove certain manipulated videos that are the product of artificial intelligence or machine learning, and that would likely mislead an average person to believe the subject of the video said words they did not say. This includes:
Faked, manipulated or transformed audio, video, or photos
Ex: changing the speed of a video to misleadingly alter the speech qualities of the speaker
Ex: adding an image into an authentic photo to present the appearance of something that actually never happened
Media edited to omit or reorder the words someone said to reverse the meaning of the statement
Ex: removing the word “not” from someone saying “I will not do X”
- PARTLY FALSE. Content has some factual inaccuracies. This includes:
Inaccuracies or miscalculations regarding numbers, dates, times, but that could be considered an interpretation of something that actually happened or was said.
Ex: misstating the number of people registered for or attending an event
Ex: miscalculating the cost of a government program
A mix of true and false key claims, where the false claims do not predominate
Ex: a list of several claims, some of which are true and some of which are false
Ex: a video that contains many key claims, some true, some false
Content presented as an opinion but based on underlying false information
Ex: advocating for a policy change supported by several key claims, one of which is provably false
- MISSING CONTEXT. Content that may mislead without additional context. This includes:
Clips from authentic video or audio or cropping of authentic photos that lacks the full context from the original content, but that have not otherwise been edited or manipulated.
Ex: cropping a video clip of someone saying “I support that candidate if …” to include only “I support that candidate”
Media edited to omit or reorder the words someone said that changes, but that does not reverse the meaning of the statement.
Ex: editing an audio clip of someone saying “person X mishandled that disaster leading to a confused response, and that’s what killed a lot of people” to appear as if they said “person X killed a lot of people”
Hyperbole or exaggeration that is technically false but based on a real event or statement.
Ex: claiming that a government program has been “zeroed out” when its funding has been dramatically reduced but not eliminated
Content that presents a conclusion not supported by the underlying facts.
Ex: A TV host airs an interview with a source who makes a provably false assertion, and the host doesn’t affirm or question the veracity of the claim.
Claims stated as fact that are plausible but unproven.
Ex: claiming that a consumer item is safe before it has completed product safety tests
- SATIRE. Content that uses irony, exaggeration, or absurdity for criticism or awareness, particularly in the context of political, religious, or social issues, but that a reasonable user would not immediately understand to be satirical. This may be from sites not clearly labeled as or widely-known as satire, or presented without clear labeling. Content rated as Satire will include fact-checkers’ articles for more context.
- TRUE. Content that contains no inaccurate or misleading information.
The public is welcome to submit requests for fact-checks at email@example.com.