Use fact-checking sites
In many cases, it is not necessary to go through the process of reviewing the accuracy of a source, since there are reliable fact-checking sites that provide the legwork for us. Use Snopes, factcheck.org, PolitiFact.com or the Washington Post Fact Checker first. However, even if the information is found to be factual, citizens must also consider the rest of the CRAAP test (or whichever reliability testing system you use) to determine whether the information is suitable for one's needs. Is it current, or is there more current reliable information on the topic? Who is the author, and are their credentials commensurate with the information need? Is the information relevant to the particular question at hand? And examining the purpose of the source can be very useful in helping to determine any underlying bias in the source. Also, facts that may be accurate can still be misleading, and following the information back to its original source might give you enough information to determine whether the context is neutral or slanted according to a set of beliefs. Finally, if you receive information that evokes an emotional response, stop, think, and check sources before responding or forwarding information to others.
(0) |
Comments (5)
Unfortunately, these days many people immediately discount and discredit sources. They are unwilling to even consider CNN or NYT because they are too liberal! As many recommend, careful listening and echoing someone's points and position could lead to a discussion of facts. I usually come with a recent study or government data. You have to dissect the credible sources for them and reveal the source's sources.
Hi Dhaivyd and Ron:
How do you reach skeptics with a fact checking message?
I imagine that depends considerably on the skeptic, as many are deeply invested in their belief system and the community that promulgates it. However, iteration may be the key in many cases: make it ubiquitous and science-based. Here's an idea: design a script that cross-references posts and provides a pop-up when content doesn't line up with the fact-checking sites, "Hmm...you may want to check your sources for accuracy..." with links to the cross-referenced fact-checking page on the topic. It could be an app people could add to their devices, and it could be run on all of the public-use computers in our libraries!
Fact checkers are fine for some subjects but can be less useful when the subject is subjective in nature or cutting edge science claims. For example I was searching on "quantum biofeedback" and Snopes has no results. What about the topic of Free Will vs. Determinism? Certain topics require more research and simple fact checking does not suffice.
Absolutely. This is often true. Usually when I don't find it on one site, I'll check the others, though, since they don't have the same content. A Single-Search conglomerating option that returns results across reliable fact-checking sites would be helpful. Then we'll need a fact-checker of the fact-checkers! Or, more practically, an authorizing/certifying system, just as we have for, say, organic products.