European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN)

VERIFIED MEMBERS

Membership in the EFCSN signifies an organisation’s rigorous commitment to provide accurate information ethically and transparently, without bias or prejudice and focus on matters in the public interest as well as a proven track record of excellence, integrity and accountability as definied in the European Code of Standards for Independent Fact-Checking Organisations.

← Return to organization page

CORRECTIV – Recherchen für die Gesellschaft gemeinnützige GmbH

Website

https://correctiv.org/

Date

31/08/2023

Please, answer the following questions:

Article 2.2: Methodology

In order to be recognised as a verified member of the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN), operations must:

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

CORRECTIV.Faktencheck examines claims from a wide range of topics. We have described in detail how we select topics and rate claims in our FAQ:

FAQ: Häufig gestellte Fragen an CORRECTIV.Faktencheck (Wie wählt ihr die Themen aus, die ihr überprüft?)

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 27/04/2023

The fact-checking process is explained comprehensibly and comprehensively in the FAQ section, where detailed explanations on methodology (e.g. selection, research) are provided. CORRECTIV.Faktencheck also works with a differentiated fact check rating scale consisting of eleven categories. In the fact checks, the explanations of the scale are linked directly under the respective rating.

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 23/05/2023

Correctiv provides an extensive FAQ segment about its work and method that is easy to find and understand. It covers all requirement aspects like the channels covered (websites, blogs, social media), its selection criteria (topicality, reach, and potential harm), fact-checking standards (primary/official sources, if available, otherwise secondary; academics to contextualize; reference of all sources used), editorial standards (four-eyes principle; easy-to-understand text), and its rating system (eleven categories in total with a link to their definitions).

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

We have a wide variety of contact channels through which claims or correction requests, for example, but also questions and suggestions can be submitted:

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 27/04/2023

CORRECTIV.Faktencheck enables users to submit potential false reports for verification via different channels: on the one hand, via the online form on the CrowdNewsroom page. On the other hand, a fact check chatbot has been available via Whatsapp since August 2021. Both options are also explained in the FAQ section. Users are also encouraged to submit suggestions on CORRECTIV.Faktencheck's social media channels. On Instagram, for example, the Whatsapp-chatbot is pointed out, and in the story highlights there is also a story in which the various options for submitting potential false reports are explained. This also includes that potential false reports can be reported via DM. On Twitter, the Whatapp chatbot and the online form are mentioned in the profile.

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 27/05/2023

Correctiv Faktencheck offers readers various channels to submit claims to check, that is via a submission mask on its website, a Whatsapp-Chatbot and in the context of its Crowd Newsroom, which aims for collaborative verifications with readers. The latter two options also explain in great detail what readers can expect to be fact-checked or how the collaborative verification process works, respectively, while the FAQs could provide more details on this issue (as you have to use the links to said WhatsApp and Crowd-Newsroom segments to get the extensive explanations).

Best Practices:

In addition to the required standards listed above, the Code identifies the following as a best practice that is encouraged but not required to join the EFCSN.

Article 3.1: Non-Partisanship and Impartiality

In order to be recognised as a verified member of the European Fact-checking Standards Network (EFCSN), operations must:

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

We have statutes which our employees are bound to. This is to ensure our independence.

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 28/04/2023

Non-partisanship, impartiality and transparency are fundamental principles of the organisation, which is committed to complying with the standards of the Seal "Gemeinnütziger Journalismus" and the "Initiative Transparente Zivilgesellschaft". Against this background, the organisation makes funding sources and partnerships transparent and has its editorial staff and economic management monitored by an ethics and supervisory board. Grants and funding over 1.000 euros are published. Finances are subject to an independent audit. The annual report of 2022 had not yet been published at the time of this audit.

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 06/06/2023

Overall, Correctiv Faktencheck takes great effort to ensure its editorial independence, and it has various policies in place to safeguard this aspiration. However, it lacks explicit policies about employees' political statements and activities, as required by the code. It is true that these kinds of provisions are complicated under German law, but employers can ask their employees - at the very least voluntarily - to restrain their public statements, especially in the name of the organization, if they reasonably undermine the organization's reputation (here: its appearance as an independent news/investigative organization) and define a set of incompatible avocations with the same rationale. Again, it is certainly a complicated matter, but dpa Faktencheck has a corresponding note on its website and seems able to find a corresponding solution.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 07/08/2023

We added a note regarding political statements to our team page:

"Hinweis: Unseren Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern ist es nicht erlaubt, bezahlte oder herausgehobene Stellungen in politischen Parteien, Regierungen sowie staatlichen Institutionen und vom Staat kontrollierten Unternehmen innezuhaben. Sie sollen im Namen von CORRECTIV.Faktencheck nicht politisch Partei ergreifen und dürfen keine Geschenke, Dienstleistungen oder sonstige Zuwendungen annehmen, die über gewöhnliche soziale Gepflogenheiten hinausgehen."

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 08/08/2023

The added note

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 08/08/2023

The amendments made meet the required standard.

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

We have statutes which our employees are bound to. This is to ensure our independence.

The mission statement and organisational structure of CORRECTIV is explained here:

Über uns (Für unabhängigen Journalismus)

We have no financial relationship to political parties. CORRECTIV has received some funding from a government agency, the Bundeszentrale für Politische Bildung which was for projects related to media literacy. Our finances can be seen here:

Transparente Finanzen

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 28/04/2023

See also 3.1.A.

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 06/06/2023

Correctiv has various policies in place to safeguard its explicit aspiration to provide independent journalism. It addresses this objective within a section in its fact-check FAQs and a dedicated segment (“Unsere Standards”), which explains its adherence to the IFCN’s Code of Principles. In its Editorial statutes or bylaws, the organization lays out clearly how it seeks to achieve these standards reaching from detailed rules about who qualifies as a financial supporter of the organization and how they deal with potential conflicts of interest. The topic of funding is further explained in a dedicated segment and lists all funders transparently. This includes funding for a media literacy project from a governmental agency (said Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung), which is known to promote awareness of democracy and political participation beyond particular political interests or parties.

Correctiv has an Ethics and Supervisory Board dedicated to ensuring compliance with the rules, and there is no evidence that the organization seeks to influence the public in favor of a particular political party or candidate.

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

Our operation checks more claims that come from the right-wing political spectrum than from the left, because we see a lot more disinformation coming from this side. Our monitoring process is designed as open as possible – everybody can submit potential misinformation to us – to minimise bias. So we see mostly manipulated, fabricated, or out-of-context quotes from politicians who are more affiliated with left-wing parties, though we also examine statements from or about politicians who are conservative.

Fact-checks concerning Ursula von der Leyen (CDU):

Fact-checks concerning Karl Lauterbach (SPD):

Fact-checks concerning Robert Habeck and Annalena Baerbock (Bündnis 90/Die Grünen):

We also checked false claims that the grandfathers of several German politicians were allegedly in the SS, concerning Christian Lindner (FDP), Olaf Scholz (SPD) and Karl Lauterbach (SPD):

This fact-checking article shows that we publish checks that open up the possibility of criticism of politicians and government agencies, for example when the federal health ministry published a misleading graph about the ratio of vaccinated to unvaccinated people:

Covid-19: Bundesgesundheitsministerium veröffentlicht irreführende Twitter-Grafik

Fact-checking articles concerning the war in Ukraine are another good example to show that we check disinformation from different sides. There is a lot of disinformation coming from the pro-Russian side, but we also checked claims coming from the pro-Ukrainian side, like for example this:

Nein, dieses Bild zeigt keinen von der Ukraine abgeschossenen russischen Jet – es stammt von 1993

Nevertheless a big narrative spread from the pro-Russian side is that Ukraine is allegedly full of Nazis - concerning this, we fact-checked fabricated media but also did some fact-checking articles which concluded that it’s true that some nazi symbols were used around the Ukrainian military:

Ja, auf diesem Foto trägt ein ukrainischer Soldat einen Totenkopf-Aufnäher mit SS-Motiven

We also publish fact-checks about climate change denialism but also reviewed claims involving climate activists themselves, including this one confirming that some activists damaged trucks:

Jugendliche, die Lastwagen beschädigten, gehören zu Animal Rebellion in Großbritannien

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 28/04/2023

The examples presented by CORRECTIV.Faktencheck are prepared according to high journalistic standards. The approach and methodology are identical for all articles, irrespective of the origin or political orientation of the allegation being checked. Attention is paid to balance and equal treatment. For example, the fact-checks listed include those that refute allegations referring to members of the government, as well as those that identify government information as misleading. With regard to the war in Ukraine, possible disinformation from both the pro-Russian and the pro-Ukrainian side is checked. All fact checks submitted, as well as the review of other fact checks posted on the website at the time of the assessment, consistently referred to reliable information and sources. In extremely rare cases, broken links can be found in the articles. Examples: in this text, the linked youtube-video no longer exists: https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2022/09/13/nein-annalena-baerbock-sagte-nicht-dass-weniger-steckdosen-das-stromsparen-foerdern-wuerden/, here the first cross-reference is a dead link: https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2022/02/22/irrefuehrende-ueberschrift-karl-lauterbach-hat-nicht-gesagt-dass-intensivstationen-nie-ueberlastet-waren/.

CORRECTIV.Faktencheck points out, there are more allegations from the right-wing political spectrum, although allegations and statements by or about conservative politicians are also investigated. The apllicants explanation that they receive more disinformation from this side seems plausible - also against the background that the internal rules make clear a high commitment to journalistic due diligence and journalistic standards (see also 2.J., 2.K., 3.1.A.). In addition, the fact checks produced cover a wide range of socially relevant topics (with a focus on the war in Ukraine, the climate crisis and migration) and do not seem to concentrate on one side of the issue or context.

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 06/06/2023

Correctiv Faktencheck has sufficient policies in place to safeguard an unbiased selection and verification process besides being open to readers’ suggestions. Its fact-checks show a slight overrepresentation of the right-wing political spectrum indeed, but this result can be justified by the higher numbers of mis- and disinformation stemming from this spectrum and gaining momentum on social media. What’s more, other parties and political forces receive scrutiny, too, and are subject to the same verification standards.

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

In our view, it is not permissible under German labour law to prevent employees from holding a prominent position in a political party. However, we clearly state that the editorial team of CORRECTIV.Faktencheck does not take a political stance and always proceeds neutrally and memberships in political parties will always be published.

FAQ: Häufig gestellte Fragen an CORRECTIV.Faktencheck (Wie stellt ihr eure Unabhängigkeit sicher?)

"Zudem werden Mitgliedschaften unserer Redakteurinnen und Redakteure, sowie aller Mitarbeiter in Vereinen, Parteien oder anderen Organisationen gegenüber unseren Unterstützern offengelegt."

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 28/04/2023

CORRECTIV.Faktencheck provides a list of its members, including short biographies.

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 06/06/2023

Correctiv addresses this issue in its FAQs in a very limited way only, stating that its members must disclose corresponding positions and activities to its supporters. Unfortunately, the term supporter is not further defined, and no such information could be found, either in the members' biografies or otherwise. This might be the case because no such potential conflict of interest exists, but that should be made explicit then. Again, Correctiv cannot simply prohibit its employees from holding political positions or making political statements, but it can - to my knowledge - demand or ask them to restrain themselves from making public statements and holding certain positions considering the interests of the organization. The existing measurements, therefore, seem to be insufficient and require rectification.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 07/08/2023

We added a note regarding positions in political parties etc. to our team page:

"Hinweis: Unseren Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern ist es nicht erlaubt, bezahlte oder herausgehobene Stellungen in politischen Parteien, Regierungen sowie staatlichen Institutionen und vom Staat kontrollierten Unternehmen innezuhaben. Sie sollen im Namen von CORRECTIV.Faktencheck nicht politisch Partei ergreifen und dürfen keine Geschenke, Dienstleistungen oder sonstige Zuwendungen annehmen, die über gewöhnliche soziale Gepflogenheiten hinausgehen."

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

We do not have a specific policy for dealing with conflicts of interest or political biases from experts or organisations cited. However, we always make these conflicts visible and clarify how the position of the possible expert or organisation is biased.

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 06/06/2023

As stated, Correctiv does not have an explicit policy on this matter and no corresponding example has been provided. Searching for fact-checks that - at least indirectly - involve Facebook itself (see examples below), no note about the collaboration between Correctiv and Meta was apparent.

https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/2023/03/21/verstoss-gegen-die-richtlinien-diese-warnungen-auf-facebook-sind-gefaelscht/
https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/hintergrund/2021/03/11/alles-fuer-mehr-klicks-der-marketing-schwarzmarkt-auf-facebook/

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 07/08/2023

In previous cases, we always added a note regarding our cooperation with Meta to fact-checks. Regarding the fact-check mentioned above, we also added one there.

Additionally, we added a section about possible conflicts of interest to our FAQ („Unsere Standards“):

„Falls wir in einem unserer Faktencheck-Artikel bzw. Recherchen eine Organisation oder ein Unternehmen thematisieren, mit dem wir eine Kooperation oder eine anderweitig geartete Beziehung haben (bspw. unsere Kooperation mit Facebook), versehen wir den Faktencheck mit einem gesonderten Hinweis. Dadrin klären wir über unser Verhältnis auf.“

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 07/08/2023

In previous cases, we always added a note regarding our cooperation with Meta to fact-checks. Regarding the fact-check mentioned above, we also added one there.

Additionally, we added a section about possible conflicts of interest to our FAQ (“Unsere Standards”):

“Falls wir in einem unserer Faktencheck-Artikel bzw. Recherchen eine Organisation oder ein Unternehmen thematisieren, mit dem wir eine Kooperation oder eine anderweitig geartete Beziehung haben (bspw. unsere Kooperation mit Facebook), versehen wir den Faktencheck mit einem gesonderten Hinweis. Darin klären wir über unser Verhältnis auf.”

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

In our view, it is not permissible under German labour law to prevent employees from making political statements. However, if there was a conflict we would make that visible and clarify how the position of the possible expert or organization is biased.

FAQ: Häufig gestellte Fragen an CORRECTIV.Faktencheck (Wie stellt ihr eure Unabhängigkeit sicher?)

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 06/06/2023

As noted (see 3.1.F), Correctiv addresses this issue to some extent but not sufficiently. It is important to note, though, that the individual social media accounts of the team members did not show explicit political endorsements of politicians or special interests.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 07/08/2023

We added a note regarding political statements to our team page:

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 08/08/2023

The added note about Corrective's policy regarding its members' political engagement and public statements meets the criteria.

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

All employees have the instruction under service law not to accept any gifts above a value of 20 €. This however is not part the editorial statute but of the service regulations of the employment contract and is therefor not a publically available policy.

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Non Compliant

Date: 28/04/2023

The organisation is committed to the standards of the Code of the German Press Council (see editorial statute), which regulates in paragraph 15 that research and reporting must not be influenced, hindered or even prevented by the acceptance of gifts, invitations or discounts and that journalists must insist that information is given regardless of the acceptance of a gift or invitation. However, the publicly available guidelines of the organisation do not contain any rules prohibiting employees from accepting gifts, favours or services in a professional context with advantageous conditions that go beyond the usual level of sociability and courtesy. The organisation points out that the service regulations of the employment contract prohibit all employees from accepting gifts above a value of €20. As this is not a publicly available policy, this cannot be verified in this audit. Such principles of conduct could, for example, be included in the editorial statutes or standards.

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 14/05/2023

I have corrected the rating to "Need more information". I have no doubt that the organisation is acting honestly. But as I have pointed out, such principles of conduct could, for example, I have also corrected this rating on Need more information. be included in the editorial statutes or standards.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 07/08/2023

We added a note regarding gifts to our team page:

"Hinweis: Unseren Mitarbeiterinnen und Mitarbeitern ist es nicht erlaubt, bezahlte oder herausgehobene Stellungen in politischen Parteien, Regierungen sowie staatlichen Institutionen und vom Staat kontrollierten Unternehmen innezuhaben. Sie sollen im Namen von CORRECTIV.Faktencheck nicht politisch Partei ergreifen und dürfen keine Geschenke, Dienstleistungen oder sonstige Zuwendungen annehmen, die über gewöhnliche soziale Gepflogenheiten hinausgehen."

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 29/08/2023

The organisation has made changes on their website (on the Team Page). Therefore, I had set the corresponding chapters 3.1.H
to compliant

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 06/06/2023

The named contractual arrangements are quite restrictive and meet this requirement.

Article 3.2: Privacy and Safety

In order to be recognised as a verified member of the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN), operations must:

Best Practices

In addition to the required standards listed above, the Code identifies the following as a best practice that is encouraged but not required to join the EFCSN.

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

In 2022, there was a multi-hour workshop for the entire team regarding handling graphic content and trauma reporting, held by an expert of the Dart Center. We plan to attend workshops again this year. In addition, it is our practice within the team to discuss how we deal with current issues related to graphic content in our daily morning meeting. No one is forced or coerced to work on such a topic. If someone on the team encounters graphic content without warning, the team member lets us know, we talk about it, and the person takes a break from work if needed and lets us know if they need psychological support beyond that.

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

Download File

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 06/06/2023

The organization is making a genuine effort to address the risk of trauma and harassment. Still, the measurements in place seem to be very informal and might not meet the criteria of a clear protocol.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 07/08/2023

This section is a best practice – we do not have anything to add here.

Article 3.3: Honest corrections

In order to be recognised as a verified member of the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN), operations must:

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

Cases like that did not occure yet.

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Non Compliant

Date: 28/04/2023

CORRECTIV.Faktencheck has a clear policy of making errors transparent (see also 3.3.A.). However, there is no specific information on the correction policy with the practice addressed in 3.3.B.

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 14/05/2023

I have also corrected this rating on "Need more information".

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 07/08/2023

We added a section to our FAQ (“Was passiert, wenn ihr einen Fehler macht”):

“Sollten wir oder jemand anders nach Veröffentlichung eines Faktenchecks einen Fehler entdecken, korrigieren wir diesen und machen die Korrektur durch einen Hinweis im Faktencheck und durch einen Hinweis in unseren Social-Media-Kanälen kenntlich.”

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 29/08/2023

The organisation has made changes on their website (in the FAQ section) - the corresponding chapter 3.3.B is now compliant.

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 06/06/2023

Does not apply

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

Cases like that did not occure last year.

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 28/04/2023

According to CORRECTIV.Faktencheck, errors as described in 3.3.C. have not occurred last year. However, the organisation has a clear correction policy to make errors transparent (see also 3.3.A.). In the fact-checks reviewed where corrections were made, these were made transparent and clearly marked. The corresponding articles are also published on a separate corrections page (https://correctiv.org/faktencheck/faktencheck-korrekturen-updates/).

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 06/06/2023

The applicant states that no such case has happened before, and the review of fact-checks could not identify any such case. That said, Correctiv’s FAQs do not specify that an explanation of the mistake is necessary besides the correction note.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 07/08/2023

We added a section to our FAQ (“Was passiert, wenn ihr einen Fehler macht”):

“Wenn Sie einen Faktencheck für fehlerhaft halten, können Sie sich unter [email protected] an uns wenden. Wir setzen uns mit jeder begründeten Kritik auseinander und ziehen gegebenenfalls Konsequenzen bis hin zur Korrektur eines Faktenchecks. Sollten große Fehler passieren, die zum Beispiel zum Zurückziehen einer Meldung führen, berichten wir dazu und klären über das Zustandekommen des Fehlers auf.”

Best Practices:

In addition to the required standards listed above, the Code identifies the following as best practices that are encouraged but not required to join the EFCSN.

Article 4.1: Organisational transparency

In order to be recognised as a verified member of the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN), operations must:

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

All important legal information about CORRECTIV can be found in our imprint. This information is updated regularly.

Impressum

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 06/06/2023

The Impressum provides all requested information except a detailed account of ownership, which could not be found on the organization's website.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 07/08/2023

We added a section about the ownership on our page Initiative Transparente Zivilgesellschaft:

"An der CORRECTIV – Recherchen für die Gesellschaft gemeinnützige GmbH halten

Dagmar Hovestädt (Vorsitzende des Kuratoriums)

20 Prozent

Lukas Beckmann (Kurator)

16 Prozent (zzgl. 16 Prozent treuhänderisch)

Christian Humborg (Kurator)

16 Prozent

Simon Kretschmer (Kurator)

16 Prozent

David Schraven (Kurator)

16 Prozent"

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 08/08/2023

The added information meet the standard.

Article 4.2: Financial transparency and conflicts of interest

In order to be recognised as a verified member of the European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN), organisations or parent organisations must:

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 29/04/2023

CORRECTIV is a non-profit organisation whose financing is based on a so called three-pillar model: (1) donations and contributions from citizens, (2) financing from foundations and institutions, and (3) income from its own economic activities (e.g. workshops, book sales). The organisation's editorial statute also regulates the transparent handling of its finances. For example, incoming donations and grants over 1,000 euros are published; anonymous donations and grants over 1,000 euros are generally not accepted. The organisation provides an annual financial report, an annual profit and loss account and an annual audit report. CORRECTIV is also committed to editorial independence. Without exception, donors therefore have no influence on editorial content, research or other editorial decisions.
The sources of income listed by the applicant are also indicated on the website (see Transparent Finances, https://correctiv.org/ueber-uns/finanzen/), which lists further donations from supporters, for instance including a five-figure sum in 2022 from the party-affiliated Friedrich Naumann Foundation (on the website, the foundation is referred to as the "Friedrich Neumann Foundation" - which is presumably the Friedrich Naumann Foundation)

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 06/06/2023

The list does not cover any source of income that appears to create a conflict of interest or potential source of influence. Still, it seems incomplete, considering the information available on the website, and does not meet the requirements in its current form.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 07/08/2023

I would like to clarify that we explain the cooperation with Meta very prominently on our site and also link this in our FAQ (“Unsere Zusammenarbeit mit Facebook”).

However, I must admit that I made a mistake in the process of the application. During the process, I got logged out and some of my inputs were not saved so I had to do the whole application a second time. In the course of this, I seem to have simply forgotten the entry for Meta’s 3PFC program.

Unfortunately, as we were only able to submit our application on the last day of the deadline, I was in a hurry and did not do adequate due diligence. I’m really sorry for this mistake.

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 08/08/2023

Correctiv added Meta's Fact-Checking Program as a source of income in its financial overview of 2022. Comparing this list with the information provided, however, I still do not find every source of income above (the here certainly relevant) 1% in the present application (see, for example, JX Fund gGmbH, Friedrich-Naumann-Stiftung, GLS Treuhand). Again, the provided funding sources seem unproblematic, but I don`t find any explanation for the inconsistencies between the information on Corrective's website and the list in this application.

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 30/08/2023

Correctiv has explained the differences sufficiently (i.e., list on website updates constantly).

Applicant

Date: 23/02/2023

Fully transparent information about our financial sources can be found on our page "Transparente Finanzen" as well as in our Jahresbericht. The version for 2022 will be added later this year:

Tanja Koehler (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 29/04/2023

CORRECTIV provides an annual financial report, an annual profit and loss account and an annual audit report. The editorial statute prescribes a transparent handling of finances, including the publication of incoming donations and grants of more than 1,000 euros. Anonymous donations and grants of more than 1.000 euros are generally not accepted. In this respect, the total annual income of the organisation is published in a separate section (https://correctiv.org/ueber-uns/finanzen/), the names of all sources of income from 1,000 euros are mentioned. The annual reports are published in the autumn of the following year. At the time of the audit, the reports were available until 2021. Lists of grants were found on the website until the year 2022.

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 06/06/2023

Correctiv offers a detailed statement of revenues that should list all income sources above 1000 € with name (except individual donors) and amount. However, the list does not include Meta/Facebook, although Correctiv takes part in Meta's Third-Party Fact-Checking Program.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 07/08/2023

We made another addition to our funding overview page Finanzen & Förderer and listed the Meta Third Party Fact Checking Program more clearly here.

“Weitere Offenlegungen in Übereinstimmung mit dem European Code of Standards for Independent Fact-Checking Organisations (Artikel 4.2.B)

Meta Third-Party Fact-Checking Program: * Einnahmen an CORRECTIV Verlag und Vertriebs UG”

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 08/08/2023

Corrective refers here now to its annual report of 2021 as opposed to the above 2022 version, which is fine as it is the most recent completed annual report. Please note Meta's Third Party Fact Checking Program here, too (and maybe for all relevant years?).

Laurens Lauer (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 30/08/2023

Compliant

Best Practices

In addition to the required standards listed above, the Code identifies the following as a best practice that is encouraged but not required to join the EFCSN.

I. ELIGIBILITY TO APPLY In order to apply to the EFCSN, your fact-checking operation must first meet the criteria outlined in Chapter 5.2 of the Code.

1. When and why was your fact-checking operation started?

2. How many people work or volunteer in the operation and what are their roles?

3. Please list any activities besides fact-checking that your operation engages in.

4. What are the goals of your fact-checking operation over the coming year?

5. Please explain the geographical scope of your fact-checking operation and how you fit the Code’s requirement to “have a substantial and demonstrable focus on one or more of the countries of the Council of Europe, Kosovo or Belarus”.

6. Please attach a list of an average of four original fact-checks per month from the past year if this is your first time applying to the EFCSN or from the past two years if you are renewing your application.

7. Please note which policies you have had to change, if any, over the past 6 months in order to comply with the Code.

2.A. Make available and easily accessible on their website an explanation of the process used to select, research and complete investigations, including a definition of any rating systems used.

2.B. Assess the merits of the evidence found using the same standards applied to evidence on equivalent claims, regardless of who made the claim.

2.C. Primarily focus on topics that are in the public interest, defined here as issues that concern the welfare of society or individuals, and be willing to explain, if requested by an assessor, how various investigations fit this definition.

2.D. Make available and easily accessible on their website a channel through which the public can submit possible claims for verification and encourage users to send claims to check, while making it clear what readers can legitimately expect will be fact-checked and what isn’t fact-checkable.

2.E. Identify and include in publications, when possible, access to all evidence or other required information for a reader to replicate the verification process.

2.F. Provide evidence for every pertinent factual statement made in an investigation, relying on primary sources where possible. Set out in its fact checks relevant evidence that appears to support the claim as well as relevant evidence that appears to undermine it.

2.H. Name all sources except when their safety is at risk. In such exceptions, anonymous sources may only be included if the information they provide is corroborated by named sources or material evidence.

2.I. When quoting experts, establish their credibility in the relevant topic.

2.J. Ensure each investigation undergoes at least one round of editing by someone other than the author before publication.

2.K. Present findings in precise, factual and non-emotive language, while taking care not to overstate conclusions.

2.K. Present findings in precise, factual and non-emotive language, while taking care not to overstate conclusions.

3.1.A. Be editorially free and politically independent.

3.1.B. Not endorse or advise the public to vote for any political parties or candidates for public office.

3.1.C. Not conclude any agreement or partnership with a political party or any other public relations and similar activities that could compromise the operation’s reputation for independence and impartiality

3.1.D. Not focus investigations unduly on one particular political party or side of the political spectrum.

3.1.E. Not employ anyone who holds a salaried and/or prominent position in a political party, government, state or public company under the direct control of a political party or government.

3.1.F. Explicitly address in publications any reasonable conflict of interest or political bias, including from experts or organisations cited.

3.1.H. Have internal policies that bar employees from accepting in a professional context any gifts, favours, or services with advantageous conditions that go beyond common social and courtesy items, and have procedures in place to take action if they do.

3.1.I. Make available and easily accessible on their website these and any other non-partisanship policies (See template in Annex 3)

3.1.J. Only advocate for issues that are relevant to the mission of fact-checking and are compatible with a reputation for independence and impartiality. Organisations that engage in advocacy must set out public guidelines on how they adhere to these standards.

3.2.A. Obscure the image and/or identity of subjects of an investigation when there is a reasonable concern for their safety.

3.2.B. Take measures to avoid exposing the source or identity of user-generated disinformation content to undue public scrutiny.

3.2.C. Be restrictive, respectful and considerate when mentioning or identifying minors and make efforts to protect their privacy.

3.2.D. Anonymise any personal information that could allow the harassment of people (i.e. at least partially concealing telephone numbers, IDs or passports, bank account numbers, email addresses…).

3.2.E. When appropriate and possible, a right-of-reply should be offered to any named person or organisation who is the source of the inaccurate claim and/or is the subject of significant criticism or allegations.

3.2.F. Put in place measures that aim to address the risk of trauma or harassment experienced by staff as a result of the operation’s activities, including but not limited to providing training to prevent and identify symptoms.

3.3.A. Correct every known mistake promptly with a correction note in the same publication in which the error was made; if the error is only typographical, grammatical or stylistic, a correction note is not needed.

3.3.B. When the original publication in which the mistake was made is not editable, disseminate the correction in the same format and channel as the original so that as far as possible users of the original see the correction and the corrected version.

3.3.E. Make available and easily accessible on their websites a corrections policy and a record of the corrections published over the previous year in the first application for EFCSN membership and of the previous two years upon renewal.

3.3.F. Include in their corrections policy, available and easily accessible on their websites, a detailed account of how they assess requests for corrections.

3.3.G. Offer audiences direct channels to request a correction, within the corrections policy on their website.

3.3.I. Undergo an internal and documented annual review of published corrections to determine whether methodological and procedural changes should be made to avoid repeating the same mistakes in the future.

3.3.H. Inform audiences of the possibility of submitting a complaint to the EFCSN under the terms of article 6 with a link to the complaint form.

4.1.A. Make available and easily accessible on their website a statement that sets out the applicant’s organisational structure and makes clear how and by whom editorial control is exercised.

4.1.B. Make available and easily accessible on their website regularly updated information related to the ownership and legal status of the operation and/or parent organisation. People or entities holding over 5% of the shares must be disclosed (see template in Annex 4).

4.1.C. Make available and easily accessible on their website regularly updated information related to the governance of the operation and/or the parent organisation (see template in Annex 5).

4.1.D. Provide proof of the ownership, legal status and governance of the organisation to the external assessors

4.1.E. Make available and easily accessible on their website regularly updated information about the identity of the editors or decision makers behind the operation, including any relevant previous roles.

4.1.F. Make available and easily accessible on their website regularly updated information about the positions held by all staff involved in the fact-checking operation’s editorial output, including any relevant previous roles.

4.1.G. Make available and easily accessible on their website a statement setting out the operation’s mission, values and internal guidelines in place to protect its independence.

4.1.H. Make available and easily accessible on their website the organisation’s bylaws, understood as the rules or statutes that govern the members of an organisation.

4.2.A. Disclose all income sources contributing 1% or 5.000 euros (whichever the higher), from the most recent annual accounts when joining and the last two annual accounts when renewing membership, to external assessors and the Governance Body

4.2.D. Make available and easily accessible on their website an updated declaration of all unpaid significant commitments made to other organisations (see Annex 9).

4.2.F. Make available and easily accessible on their website goods and services they receive from external sources, including paid subscriptions or free access to tools, software and/or advertising, that make a material difference to their finances (5% of net income).

4.2.H. Make available and easily accessible on or from their website the full annual accounts of their organisation for each year since joining the EFCSN.