Here are some tips for determining if a story is likely reliable. An organization does not need to tick off all these qualifiers in order to be considered authentic and accurate, but the more you see red flags pop up, the more a healthy skepticism is in order.
You’ll notice these are “tips” and not a checklist. Checklists can oversimply the nuances of discernment into black-and-white boxes.
1. ORIGINAL REPORTING. Does this article cite sources likely to know this information? Does the news organization have reporters attending news conferences in person, working in cities where the news is happening, and talking to key sources directly? Or does the organization have to rely on second-hand information from other sites?
2. LONE-WOLF REPORTING. Compare the information with other sites you trust. Are these sites reporting the same information? The site might have a scoop, but a lack of multiple independent accounts means it is more likely that the story is false. Sometimes lack of coverage is the result from writer and producer bias within a company or the result of the particular focus of the outlet (which may include not offending certain sponsors or other companies owned by the same parent company). Typically, you should expect more than one source reporting on an important topic or event. Plus, it’s always best to read multiple sources of information to get various viewpoints and media frames.
3. AP STYLE. Most legitimate news organizations will use the AP Stylebook as a writing guide (no Oxford comma, full name on the first reference and only last name thereafter, etc.). Some organizations have developed their own style guides (New York Times, Wall Street Journal, etc.). Most news organizations use an in-house style guide (to deal with writing issues unique to the publication’s area of reporting).
4. POOR GRAMMAR. When a writer makes obvious grammatical mistakes, they also may not have taken the time to ensure the article’s facts are accurate.
5. ADJECTIVES & ADVERBS. Objective journalism avoids adjectives and adverbs. The more of them used in an article, the more you should question whether the writer’s goal is to inform you or to convince you of something.
6. BALANCE. Did the writer engage with anyone who disagreed with the gist of the article? Quality news organizations are looking for both sides—and sometimes, there are more sides than that.
7. EXPERTS. Does the article quote not only more than one side in a dispute but experts as well? A he-said-she-said story without experts’ opinions in the field is weak reporting. When there’s only a single source for a news article, be hesitant to accept the information without further corroboration.
8. OBJECTIVE. Like the scientist aiming to discover the truth, having some bias does not mean a journalist cannot arrive at the truth through a tested and effective approach (as does the scientific method, despite the researcher’s bias). The complaint that “no one can really be objective” misses the point that it’s not the journalists themselves but the articles that need to be neutral. While bias websites can still post real news, carefully look at the specific evidence, they offer and see if reporting from other legit sites backs it up.
9. OPINION. Is the article part of an opinion section? Does the video feature a commentator? Commentary has a long history of having a part inside the pages of newspapers, but many readers confuse an editorial article with news reporting. The same can happen online or on TV news. There’s no need for an opinion piece to be neutral in its presentation. Just don’t confuse it with an unbiased news piece.
10. GENERIC ENEMIES. Does the article focus on vague foes who are never specified? “The media,” “supporters of (insert name of politician),” “The right,” “The left,” “Washington,” etc. Good reporting doesn't make these kinds of generalizations.
11. DOXING. Doxing is making private information public in order to hurt a person or organization. If the writer suggests anything like doxing, run the other way.
12. EMBEDDED LINKS. Quality journalism values clarity over style. Links in the article to original source material show a commitment to transparency and allow readers to make up their own minds about its use. Sometimes bogus stories will cite official or official-sounding sources and even link back to them that do not back up the claims in the article. An article without links or quotes from identified sources should be suspect.
13. SPONSORED CONTENT. Some legit news organizations publish articles similar to what they usually publish as real news—only, in this case, an advertiser actually sponsors the material. The intention could be to provide legitimate information about a subject while at the same time promoting the advertiser's product. Sometimes referred to as native advertising, reputable publishers will identify the article as “sponsored content” or “paid partner content” in a prominent location. A precursor to sponsored content was advertorials—a combination of advertising and editorial opinion. These placements were ads disguised as editorial content.
14. LOCAL REPORTING. If the story involved a particular locale, was local expertise included? Was the reporting conducted on the scene?
15. YOUR REACTION. Be sensitive to occasions when you become angry as you read an article. If you are outraged after reading something, the story may be written to manipulate your emotions. The more shocking and outrageous, the more work is necessary to confirm the information before passing it along.
16. PARTISAN APPEAL. If a story sounds big but appears only on hyperpartisan sites and seems designed for outrage, it could have significant flaws that stopped legitimate news outlets from covering it.
17. FIRSTHAND SOURCES. Use an article’s information to work back to original sources to verify what’s in the article. If the report references a lawsuit, it can often be found online through a Google search or third party like Scribd, CourtListener, or DocumentCloud. Or, if the article references something a company is doing, check that company’s website (or a government agency) to see if there is a news release about that topic or an announcement on a site like PR Newswire.
18. MULTIPLE SOURCES. Use keywords from the article (unique terms such as someone’s name) that are likely to bring up the same topic from another source using Google News search. The information from each story can be compared. It is unusual for a single outlet to have exclusive information, especially after several days have passed since the article was posted. To avoid generic, unhelpful search results, use unique keywords in your search—like the name of an unfamous person who’s quoted in the story.
19. TANTALIZING QUOTES. Search for a questionable quote by pasting the text (in quotation marks) into a search engine. If the exact phrasing doesn’t come up or if only a few small outlets have printed the outrageous quote (perhaps from a famous person or politician), then be skeptical about its authenticity. Look for the sentences before and after the quote that makes your blood boil. If the article fails to give them, that could be a warning sign. If the quote is taken out of context, the site (or writer) belongs on your naughty list.
20. SOCIAL MOVEMENTS. A social movement or political uproar can be manufactured artificially. Look for evidence that the people behind a petition or boycott are real people and the effort is organic. Social media posts shouldn’t come from obscure users or bots. There’s a difference between a few snarky tweets and an actual public outcry.
21. THE WRITERS CREDENTIALS. Does the writer possess specialized knowledge in an area, either advanced education or experience covering a particular beat? This is especially important for opinion pieces. A list of qualifications in a writer’s bio should inform the audience as to their expertise. If they are not knowledgeable about the topic, they rely on other sources. An article without quotes or information from experts raises red flags, especially if creators present themselves as experts when they’re actually enthusiasts.
22. ODD WORDING. AI-created text lacks the ability to write in a way that sounds natural—for now. When word choices or sentence structures are odd, it could be the product of a computer. The same is true with repeatedly using the same words and phrases or writing that lacks emotion. These are signs of machine-generated text.
OpenAI’s GPT-2 Detector is a tool that help to identify whether text is likely AI generated. While AI writing tools are not useful for reliable scientific texts without strong human intervention, it is likely predatory journals will exploit the quick production of scientific articles to generate low-quality content.
23. IMPROBABLE PRECISION. It’s a red flag when someone claims, "I drove from Chicago to Miami in 1.5847 hours." That kind of precision is unlikely.
More about spotting fake news
