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

Fundación Maldita.es

Website

https://maldita.es/

Date

15/06/2023

Please, answer the following questions:

Applicant

Date: 10/01/2023

42 people are part of our operation.

EXECUTIVE POSITIONS

1 CEO
1 DIRECTOR
1 COO
1 CTO
1 CFO
1 ASSISTANT DIRECTOR & HEAD OF PUBLIC POLICY

MIDDLE POSITIONS

2 NEWSROOM COORDINATORS

EDITORIAL TEAMS

MALDITO BULO: 1 COORDINATOR, 2 JOURNALISTS, 1 MIGRATION JOURNALIST, 1 CYBERSECURITY JOURNALIST
MALDITO DATO: 1 COORDINATOR & 2 JOURNALISTS
MALDITA CIENCIA: 1 COORDINATOR, 1 SCIENCE JOURNALIST, 2 CLIMATE JOURNALISTS
MALDITA TECNOLOGÍA: 1 COORDINATOR
MALDITA HEMEROTECA: 1 JOURNALIST
COMMUNITY & ENGAGEMENT: 1 COORDINATOR & 1 CM
AUDIOVISUALS: 1 COORDINATOR & 1 JOURNALIST

NON EDITORIAL TEAMS

PROJECTS: 3 PROJECT ASSISTANTS
MALDITA EDUCA: 1 COORDINATOR, 4 EDUCATORS & 1 INTERN
ACADEMIC RESEARCH: 1 COORDINATOR & 1 INTERN
PUBLIC POLICY: 1 POLICY ASSISTANT
ADMINISTRATION: 1 ADMINISTRATION ASSISTANT
ENGINEERING: 1 ENGINEER
COMMUNICATION: 1 EXTERNAL COMMUNICATION OFFICER
DESIGN: 1 DESIGNER

Furthermore, we have a program called ‘Superpowers’ in which our community can participate in donating their knowledge and expertise to Maldita. Over 3000 experts have entered their data in our database and donate their knowledge to us when needed. More on this here.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 04/04/2023

The organization of the staff and the units confirm that the applicant is dedicated to fact-checking as a core activity. However, it would be advisable to know if there is any gender gap in Maldita, the previous training of the staff, and if they have integrated any people with disabilities in order to also assess their commitment and social responsibility. These options were not required by the application, but they would perform a better understanding of the fact-checker's profile. It could be considered as a suggestion for implementing future forms.

Applicant

Date: 10/01/2023

We are currently redefining how we envision ourselves as an organisation within civil society and how we “tell our story”. Within the first quarter of the year our strategic plan will redefine our mission and vision for the years ahead keeping in mind that our purpose is to serve the public in the fight against mis and disinformation.

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 04/04/2023

While it is clear the organization has a clear fact-checking profile, this answer is open ended and it is difficult to assess the goals that have not been expressed.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 24/05/2023

As explained in our application, we hadn't developed our strategic plan before submitting the application. Now Maldita has developed its strategic planning for the next 3 years. Please find the key areas below:

1. Journalism and Investigation: Rather than fact-checking understood as ratings, we want to take our operation further, investing in investigations about disinformation and disinformation actors together with strengthening our explanatory approach to complex topics and deepening our work in providing tools and resources for citizens to better inform themselves.

2. Technological and product development: we will keep on building and improving our tools for disinformation early detection, user engagement with fact-checking and narrative analysis through AI.

3. Community and external communication: we will continue investing in our superpowers program which engages our audience in donating their expertise for our newsroom to have quicker access to high quality sources while promoting diversity of sources within the Spanish media landscape. In this regard, we will continue contacting and onboarding Universities to our program. Furthermore, we will develop an onboarding platform for our community to better understand the different ways in which they can engage with Maldita.es. Finally, we are developing a Q&A platform called La Dudoteca that will connect users' queries to experts to speed up the answering process that will at all point be overviewed by our fact-checkers.

4. Public policies and discourse: We will continue our efforts in supporting the EFCSN together with closely following the development of the DSA and the CoP. We will also pay close attention to AI legislative developments in the following years and will do our best to support policymakers with data and evidence based solutions.

5. Education: While continuing with our focus on elderly people while investing in expanding our international training program for journalists.

6. Cooperation: We intend to continue contributing in the advancement of the future of fact-checking, creating spaces in which different stakeholders can connect and collaborate with the fact-checking community while maintaining our international position. We want to pursue the objective of developing technology applied to fact-checking that can be useful to the community.

7. Sustainability: we will work in continuing the diversification of our sources of revenue to secure sustainability and independence of our organisation.

8. Organizational culture: as our organisation grows, we will need to continue implementing SOPs and internal protocols that guarantee the smooth cooperation of all areas while promoting our internal culture, values and mission.

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 31/05/2023

Thank you so much.
This is great and it really answers my "need more information".
it is clear the applicant's strategic plan has clear objectives, well aligned with its core activities, and new developments at all levels.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 04/04/2023

Self-analysis and self-criticism are strength points in Maldita, but I would have appreciated greater specificity and variety in the goals, especially considering that 2023 is a year of intense electoral activity in Spain

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: 10/01/2023

The fact-checking methodology that governs how we choose what we investigate all but ensures that our content is solely focused on issues in the public interest. As our published methodology explains, when picking topics we first guide ourselves by what the public itself considers dubious, intriguing, possibly misleading, or in need of context. By focusing our attention on open tiplines such as our WhatsApp chatbot and by generally gearing towards high-impact contents, we allow the public itself to define what it is the public interest for this purpose, rather than trying to define it according to our own biases or personal misconceptions.

We only allow one rare exception to this rule and that is to investigate topics that are not highly impactful at the moment, but that could lead to serious risk for persons if they quickly become viral. In that case, we consider ourselves acting on an issue in the public interest too, just because the consequences of inaction could represent a far greater risk to it.

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 11/04/2023

The applicant explains in the methodology how following what attracts the public attention is a good way to focus on public interest. The content revision shows this is also a regular practice as the applicant is covering both issues related with news, with seasonal issues (upcoming elections, tax season, or HolyWeek break). They also cover celebrities-related content that are usually very popular in social media.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 07/04/2023

After reviewing the content published by Maldito Bulo, it is observed that the activity is focused on a variety of topics of public interest (climate change, fires, elections, migration, digital scams, health, etc.). The selection criteria are based on their virality and level of serious risk for persons, although these aspects are not transparently explained. It is unknown how many WhatsApp messages have requested a verification or how many times a false message has been forwarded on social networks, previous indicators to start the investigation.

Applicant

Date: 10/01/2023

Our audience can reach out to us and submit claims in many different ways.

We have an automated tipline on WhatsApp (+34 644 229 319) that we promote specifically for people to ask questions or forward suspect content, including a reminder in all sections of our website and most debunks. The social media accounts for our different anti-disinformation projects have the option to send direct messages enabled and we regularly encourage our audience to send tips on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and Tik Tok:

https://twitter.com/malditobulo

https://twitter.com/MalditoDato

https://es-es.facebook.com/malditobulo/

https://www.facebook.com/mhemeroteca/

https://www.instagram.com/malditobulo/?hl=es

https://www.instagram.com/maldita.es/?hl=es

https://www.tiktok.com/@malditobulo

In addition to that, some of our projects have dedicated email addresses or in-site forms to encourage people to submit claims.

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 11/04/2023

There are several efficient ways to contact the applicant. The most prominent one is the WhatsApp tipline that is visually present in their main page and in each piece of content. It is also present in the other social media profiles where they have an account. It is easy to both check if a content has been debunked and to send a question or a tip to them.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 07/04/2023

Maldito Bulo is accessible through various social media channels (Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Tik Tok) and in most of them, it appears its Whatsapp channel, the most widely used immediate communication channel in Spain, and therefore an easily accessible channel for the public to submit claims. This channel is also highlighted on the website, so it is considered the priority communication channel for the fact-checker. Maldita also offers a bulobot on Telegram (with over 17,000 subscribers) where users are considered receivers, not emitters. Weaknesses detected: It is unknown how many daily requests they receive through each of these channels or the communication preferences of users in a clear way. Additionally, although some sections include a contact form (e.g., Climate, Science, Technology, Feminism, Food...), this solution is difficult to find as it applies different locations, colours and appearance. Email addresses are also not easily located; I could find only two after a while ([email protected] and [email protected]). It's missing also a description that helps their audience understand what can/cannot be fact-checked before the submission of the claim. Conclusion: Compliant but not in a perfect way. Sometimes multiple options are confused.

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 11/04/2023

The methodology explains how the investigation is conducted including revision of original sources, conversations and checking with experts.
And publications include access to all the evidences. For example, regarding some fires affecting a region in the north of Spain, and to explain how an image was an old one, the content refers to the regional newspaper that published the original image picture in 2021 (https://maldita.es/clima/20230407/incendio-asturias-basilica-covadonga/). In another publication where some were denouncing the presence of some drugs, the publication analyzes the image, the original publication on Instagram and also the previous ones to link the image to another campaign.Then, the source is also taken into account: https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230410/irene-montero-iglesias-foto-raya-cocaina/.
Another publication where an explosion was related to an electric car (https://maldita.es/clima/20230405/video-coche-electrico-estalla-carga/), the dates of the video were checked, contextual information was used, also some experts were consulted and finally the work or other fact-checker was used as reference.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 07/04/2023

All reviewed fact-checks have several links, screenshots and/or photographs, online evidence used to reach the conclusion of the investigation. Sometimes the publications offer updates.

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 11/04/2023

Factual statements are usually supported by primary and open sources. In a publication about some fires affecting the north of Spain and trying to debunk the claim that those are linked to the upcoming elections, some official and diverse sources are used and linked to explain how in the last 20 years fires have been taken place during the same period and another source (public and open) is used to explain that elections have been taking place in several months, so no relation could be claimed during these events (https://maldita.es/clima/20230405/incendios-asturias-elecciones-autonomicas/).
In another publication about potential interferences of a company in the elections results, it is true that most of the sources are previous publications of the applicant, as this is a recurrent issue. But the piece also includes a link to the official tender website where conditions are stated, and also declarations of the incumbent about its role (https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230410/supuesto-hackeo-indra-resultados-elecciones/).
In other piece covering a scam, the content analyzes the url address making clear that some popular brands are not behind it.
This piece about the presence of graphene as a component of a COVID-19 vaccine (https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230404/documento-pfizer-oxido-grafeno-portaobjetos/)the publication explains in detail how the document it refers is a real one but not related to the vaccines but to other products. All the statements are explained with the appropriate evidence from external sources.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 07/04/2023

Maldita provides evidence for every pertinent factual statement in investigations since 2023. Fact-checks are not only for conclusions. Maldita gets statements of direct sources, experts, included as background or context in the fact-check. It appears names and/or links. One item of the analysed sample ("Por qué los datos no indican una relación entre las elecciones autonómicas y las olas de incendios en Asturias") contains 11 links, 2 expert statements, and a Flourish data visualization developed by Maldita based on official sources(SADEI, JEC).
It is perceived a clear evolution, an improvement of the news coverage, with a greater lengthening of the writing (more long stories) to include more direct and indirect sources, and visual resources that facilitate the understanding of the topic.

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 11/04/2023

The methodology says explicitly that they are using at least two sources to verify an investigation.
But despite this, using at least two sources is the norm in the applicant publications. For example in a piece about three European countries claiming against WHO, Reuters note is quoted, but also some conversations with officials of the embassies of those countries, plus another page referring the picture in question as an old one (https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230321/polonia-suecia-noruega-demanda-oms-infectar-europa/).
Another publication about an interview to Bill Gates (https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230316/bill-gates-entrevista-covid-video-manipulado/) the original video is supplied and also an interview with and expert explaining how IA tools make possible to manipulate videos.
In a publication about a picture showing a former politician with a LatinAmerican leader (https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230314/no-esta-foto-de-pablo-iglesias-con-nicolas-maduro-no-es-real-es-un-montaje/), at least three sources are offered.
In contrast, in a publication about a manipulated picture of a Spanish politician only the original picture vs the modified one is shown as evidence of the manipulation (https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230314/feijoo-marcial-dorado-imagen-narcotraficante-barbacoa/).

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 07/04/2023

These practices are outlined in the applicant’s methodology. A random sample of fact-checks confirms the correct use of sources in 2023 (at least two, and primary). Sometimes the content is reinforced with links to legacy media (The New York Times, El País,etc.)

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 11/04/2023

It has to be said beforehand that Maldita has an extensive network of experts that collaborate with them donating their knowledge. Every time one of those donors collaborate in a publication his/her expertise is explained.
For example, in a publication about Parkinson disease https://maldita.es/malditaciencia/20230411/dia-mundial-parkinson-sintomas-diagnostico-precoz-importancia-sensibilizacion-enfermedad/, one expert is quoted and he is introduced properly (Moisés García Arencibia, bioquímico, biólogo molecular) as a donor. In the same article another expert is mentioned, not a donor, and he is also introduced correctly:"neurólogo Diego Santos, miembro del Grupo de Estudio de Trastorno del Movimiento de la Sociedad Española de Neurología (SEN) y colaborador de la FEP".
In another text about the potential disruption of elections several experts are consulted and all of them are introduced as cybersecurity experts: https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230410/supuesto-hackeo-indra-resultados-elecciones/

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 07/04/2023

Experts who are cited are introduced with evidence of their credibility and expertise on the topic. It involves linking to their social media (https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230403/secretaria-estado-francesa-marlene-schiappa-playboy/) and citing their area of expertise ("Pepe Almodóvar, ingeniero de montes, director de extinción en el dispositivo de incendios forestales de Castilla La-Mancha y miembro de la Fundación Pau Costa, aseguró a Maldita.es que “la construcción de un parque eólico no requiere la recalificación del suelo”). Sometimes Maldita reproduces a quote published by a journal (p.e. Zach Zalewski, doctor en Genética y abogado especializado en derecho de la salud, valora en Medpage Today que esta petición de transparencia “incluirá literalmente cada trozo de papel que se presentó a la FDA durante toda la pandemia” / https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230404/documento-pfizer-oxido-grafeno-portaobjetos/ ) or fact-checker (p.e. Francesco Cacciante, doctor en Biología Molecular en la Scuola Normale Superiore de Pisa (Italia) y divulgador en el canal de YouTube A Caccia Di Scienza, explica a Open.online medio miembro la International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN), al igual que Maldita.es, que en el tipo de microscopio que se usa en este caso se necesita un portaobjetos de un material que absorba o refleje electrones, y el óxido de grafeno, en este caso, serviría.).

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 11/04/2023

The methodology clearly explains that there are 10 persons, all of them identified by name, surname and position, that have the responsibility of checking all the investigations. Once it has at least four ok and with any "no" it can go ahead. But all these 10 people have veto power to any investigation if they can argue his/her position.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 07/04/2023

According to Maldita's methodology, a member of the team creates a first draft of the investigation including primary sources and technological fact-check. The rest of the members evaluate the fact-check, asking about the procedure. Finally, a revised version is voted on by 10 Maldita's editors. If there are no votes against, the fact-check will be published once it has 4 votes in favor. If there is one vote against, the fact-checking process has to address the doubts raised or the reason for the vote against, and a new vote is taken. All members with voting rights also have the right of veto. If someone vetoes a fact-check with a reasoned argument and after discussion with the members with voting rights, their veto remains unchanged, it will not be published. There is no ideological veto, and it must be supported by other reasoned and accepted reasons.

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: 10/01/2023

The safeguards on conflict of interest apply to all of the organisation’s activities and not just fact-checking, so they are outlined in Maldita’s neutrality policy https://maldita.es/politica-de-neutralidad/

Within our neutrality policies we give two examples:
- If it could be interpreted that there is a conflict of interest between a member of the team and a journalistic issue, said member will be separated from the management of that specific issue to protect the honesty and credibility of the contents of Maldita.es. Here an example.
- In the same way, when we address a topic in which it can be interpreted that there is a conflict of interest that affects Maldita.es itself, we will explicitly inform our readers of it. Here an example.

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 12/04/2023

The possibility of the existence of CoI is explicitly mentioned in the applicant's public methodology and also it is clear the procedure to follow in that case.
The examples provided show how they act in cases where a potential CoI exists for a team member or when the organization is part of the investigation. According to the team's profiles, none to them has been involved until now with political parties so this case is not provided because does not exist.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 07/04/2023

This practice/requirement is written in the applicant’s methodology. The applicant complies with this standard based on the provided evidence.

Applicant

Date: 10/01/2023

NON PARTISAN POLICY: https://maldita.es/politica-de-neutralidad/
ETHICS CODE: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JycZQS8XXvasanYwqgstGtHLFBnpoRKD/view

PUBLIC POLICY RULES: https://maldita.es/uploads/public/docs/normas-actividades-politicas-concenciacion-lobby-maldita.pdf

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 12/04/2023

Under the "About us" link, present on the main menu, there is a direct link the non partisan policy. The Ethical code and the public policy rules are accesible at a second level.
Regarding the non partisan policy, the applicant website include the following points:
- neutrality and non partisanship are essential to their work and their credibility
- they will never ask or advice about the vote for a particular party or candidate. They admit that they only will take a public and official position when their core values are affected: disinformation, journalism, fact-checking, media literacy, technology, transparency and freedom of expression
- no agreement with any political party will take place
- while team members at an individual level could take position, the organization itself its not allow to do that
- if a team members gets involved with a political party or a public institution through a contract, that implies that he/she immediately leave his/her job at the organization
- If a CoI exists in a particular investigation for a team member, she/he will be leave out the procedure to protect the applicant's credibility
- if the CoI affects the applicant organization this will be make clear in the publication
- all the team members, at the moment of joining the organization will sign an Ethical Code that also includes an explicit mention to not accepting gifts that go beyond common social and courtesy rules

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 07/04/2023

This informational requirement is included in the neutrality policy, and it is easily accessible in Maldita website.

Applicant

Date: 10/01/2023

IN ENGLISH: https://maldita.es/uploads/public/docs/maldita_es_guidelines_for_advocacy_public_policy_and_lobbying_activities.pdf

IN SPANISH: https://maldita.es/uploads/public/docs/normas-actividades-politicas-concenciacion-lobby-maldita.pdf

Available on our website here: https://maldita.es/politicas-publicas-desarrollo-institucional/

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 12/04/2023

The applicant is clear about how the organization will take a public position in advocacy only when issues directly related with its mission are at stake.
The applicant is and has been actively involved in several activities to promote the fight against disinformation, the fact-checking role and status, and journalism. Besides what they have already done, as been part of the Expert Group of the UE on disinformation, during the last two years Maldita has taken part in several initiative promoted by the Spanish Government with other actors. The National Security Department created a task force on disinformation were Maldita took part in several working groups. A book has been published as a result, https://www.dsn.gob.es/sites/dsn/files/LibroDesinfoSN.pdf, and as the rest of the participants (researchers, fact-checkers, journalists organizations, social media platforms), have been invited to the book presentation and other meetings with the purpose of continue this public-private collaboration. The last one was a meeting that took place in the Presidential residence where an EU expert presented a proposal for a common framework to categorize disinformation.
Maldita has also a strong position on the media literacy activities and its also collaborating with other media outlets in the country.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 07/04/2023

The guidelines for advocacy, public policy and lobbying activities provided by Maldita are accurate, based on transparency, and international references (IFCN). For example: All meetings with political actors or elected officials about public policy
issues will be listed on a public registry accessible through the website within a maximum of 90 days, including information on the date and subject matter.

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:

Applicant

Date: 10/01/2023

As per our fact-checking methodology, we protect the identity of any subject as long as the identity is not relevant for the debunk (please see an example) and in every case if there is a risk of that person being harassed or suffering from overexposure (please see an example). The only exception is that we will not obscure the identity of public figures, institutions or media outlets (example), or if the person is a serial disseminator of disinformation that we have verified and has not issued a correction (example).

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 12/04/2023

The applicant methodology is quite clear about this point and what it states is consistent in all the publications I have gone through: when identity is not relevant for debunking, the subject identity is always protected, as it is in case a risk of harassment exists. Media outlets accounts or serial disseminators of disinformation are not protected.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 08/04/2023

According to the evidence, a random sample review and the explanation, Maldita takes responsibility and protect the identity of any subject when he/she is not relevant for the debunk, or if the person is being harassed. In general public figures are not obscured.

Applicant

Date: 10/01/2023

While when doing political fact-checking we always offer politicians or political parties a right of reply in the following 24 hours (as stated in our methodology), but we do not apply the same rule to our debunking methodology for two reasons:

1. Professional disinformants are usual subjects of our work: giving them a right of reply can lead to harassment of our journalists.

2. Through our experience we’ve seen how disinformation thrives and escalates when going viral even if the source has made a correction. In such cases we will fact-check the content and duly note in our piece if the source has corrected its mistake..

Furthermore, when talking about subjects of criticism The victims of disinformation can have names and surnames: politicians, businessmen; be companies or society itself. In the cases in which we can contact the person or company that is the target of the lies, we will do so as part of the fact-checking (as regarded in our methodology) but always bearing into account that being an interested party which denies something does not qualify as a hoax without having more elements that allow us to do independently fact-check it.

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 12/04/2023

The applicant states that when doing political fact-checking they offer 24 hours to the parties/politicians to reply, but the referred page mentions a 12 working hours period to wait for an answer. While the meaning is probably the same, it would be good to adjust this information (either the one on the website or the on this application).
In any case, it is clear that the reply is always part of the process when doing political fact-checking while in other cases, as when a businessman/woman is subject of a potential hoax, this is applied with other objective in mind: to protect a potential victim.
There are some scam cases where the subject, celebrities, have not been contacted as they are victims also as in here: https://maldita.es/timo/20200425/gerard-pique-bitcoinpro-inversion/. When an institution name is used to promote a scam, it is not necesarily contacted, but whatever information this institution has provided is used in the debunking: https://maldita.es/timo/20230404/ibercaja-sms-inicio-sesion-phishing/.
Sometimes celebrities are used in disinformation campaigns, as in this case, https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230404/bulos-y-desinformaciones-aitana/. Here, as it is a recurrent case, the singer was not contacted as it was clearly a falsehood.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 08/04/2023

Formally, Maldita meets this requirement. However, it is not possible to know: 1) the communication that the fact-checker maintains with sources or people/target of disinformation issues; 2) how many times Maldita takes the initiative in that contact.

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: 10/01/2023

Applicant

Date: 16/01/2023

Download File

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Non Compliant

Date: 08/04/2023

No submission, no review.

Applicant

Non Compliant

Date: 24/05/2023

We have a set of guidelines when it comes to handling misinformative content and have facilitated access to mental health specialists during difficult situations to the team, but I don’t think we have a strong enough strategy for it to be considered a best practice and therefore I think we should be evaluated on it.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 05/06/2023

Thank you for the information. It is not mandatory to fill / evaluate this point. However, if I do not select any option, I cannot save the form. Blank is recognised as an error. So, I will introduce "compliant" but it is a false result

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: 10/01/2023

https://maldita.es/politica-de-rectificacion/

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 12/04/2023

Yes, the applicant complies with this standard. Its rectification policy is clear and adequate.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 08/04/2023

Formally, Maldita meets this requirement as there is a corrections policy on the website and it offers several examples of the application. However, we can observe a wide number of updates where is not specified what content has been modified, why o which paragraphs are affected. P.e.: https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230408/bulos-zombies-manos-limpias/
https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230407/cuidado-imagenes-inteligencia-artificial-reales/

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 24/05/2023

In those articles that have a both a date of publication and a date of update but no * or acknowledgement of correction is made that is due to the fact that nothing in the article has changed from its first publication. We often republish by updating articles that relate to a current disinformation that we may have debunked in the past so that it reincorporates to the news cycle: it appears in our front page and our rss feed, it red indexes in search engineer, etc. There is no acknowledgment of anything being updated in the text because nothing has changed.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 05/06/2023

Thank you for this clarification

Applicant

Date: 10/01/2023

https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20190730/no-la-torre-eiffel-no-se-ha-iluminado-con-la-bandera-colombiana-por-la-victoria-de-egan-bernal-en-el-tour-de-francia/

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 12/04/2023

The applicant's corrections policy includes a reference to updates of existing publications and it is well explained.
During the assessment it has been possible to see that this practice is usual and updating and explaining the reason why new information has been added to a publication is part of the applicant's work procedure.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 08/04/2023

According to the evidence, Maldita meets this requirement as there is a corrections policy on the website and it offers several examples of the application. All updated content includes a final paragraph explaining when it has been modified.

However, we can observe a wide number of updates where is not specified what content has been modified, why o which paragraphs are affected. P.e.: https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230408/bulos-zombies-manos-limpias/
https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230407/cuidado-imagenes-inteligencia-artificial-reales/

Applicant

Date: 10/01/2023

https://maldita.es/politica-de-rectificacion/

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 12/04/2023

Yes, the applicant publishes the record of corrections (2) on its website in compliance with this standard.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 08/04/2023

The corrections policy includes several real examples and how they have been fixed by Maldita. However, at the end of that section there is a record presenting only two corrections made between June 2021 and November 2022. It is not updated.
By the way, if we use the search engine to locate the work "correction" in Maldita website, only two news items are listed.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 24/05/2023

The ones listed were the corrections that had taken place until our submission of the application. We have updated the date to May 2023 and added an additional correction made this month: https://maldita.es/malditobulo/20230503/video-ayuso-borracha-recortado/

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 05/06/2023

I appreciate this update

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 12/04/2023

The applicant's policy outlines how assess requests are managed explaining different reasons to reassess a publication and giving examples.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 08/04/2023

The applicant do not explains the process for assessing requests for corrections. Maldita offers an email ([email protected]) and social networks to receive information for corrections. Users can provide data or public and verifiable files to analyse if any mistake has ocurred in order to proceed with the correction. But the website does not detail who is/are responsible por this review, the deadline to resolve this issue or if Maldita will offer any explanation to the user.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 24/05/2023

We’ve updated our policy to note that we will review the complaint as soon as possible and that we will try our best to answer. We don’t want to commit to a specific deadline because depending on the topic complaints are quick to review or may take days. We are committed to start reviewing it when it comes in, but cannot guarantee how long it will take. Likewise, we do not want to commit ourselves to answering any complaint that comes in because such affirmations can be weaponized for harassment purposes. We receive harassment on a daily basis, including troll campaigns of complaints against our works that we don’t necessarily want to oblige ourselves to answer.

En Maldita.es creemos en la colaboración como uno de los pilares fundamentales para poder ganar la batalla contra la desinformación: te escuchamos si crees que algo que hemos desmentido no es correcto. Puedes contactar con nosotros a través de nuestras redes sociales o enviando un correo a [email protected]. Cualquier dato o documento público y contrastable que nos enviéis será tenido en cuenta para analizar si se ha producido un error y poder proceder a la rectificación del contenido publicado. Procuraremos revisarlo en el menor tiempo posible.

Siempre escuchamos y leemos atentamente todos los puntos de vista, pero creemos que es importante subrayar que Maldita.es es un medio de comunicación independiente que responde a las metodologías existentes en esta página y al criterio editorial de su redacción. Por eso, las solicitudes de rectificación no pueden ser un intento de guiar o censurar la información publicada. En estos casos, el equipo de Maldita.es analizará los argumentos expuestos por quien solicita la rectificación y se verificará como el resto de informaciones, es decir, con datos y hechos contrastables y que sean de acceso público o se puedan hacer accesibles y cuya autenticidad esté demostrada. En la medida de lo posible, el equipo de Maldita.es procurará dar respuesta al usuario que solicita la corrección, como hace con todas las preguntas y solicitudes de la ciudadanía.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 05/06/2023

Thank you for solving this point updating the policy

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.

Applicant

Date: 10/01/2023

Download File

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Non Compliant

Date: 08/04/2023

No submission, no review.

Applicant

Non Compliant

Date: 24/05/2023

This is the first year we apply to the EFCSN and therefore we haven’t done such review yet. Nevertheless, this is a best practice.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Non Compliant

Date: 05/06/2023

It is not mandatory to evaluate nor fill out this point . However, the form doesn't work if I do not select any option. In this case it would be "not compliant"

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 06/06/2023

According to EFCSN, best practices if they are blank they will always be compliant.

Applicant

Date: 10/01/2023

https://maldita.es/politica-de-rectificacion/#:~:text=Maldita.es%20est%C3%A1%20en,utilizando%20este%20link.

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 12/04/2023

The applicants explains that as part of EFCSN if someone is not satisfied of how a complaint has been managed and answered he/she could apply to the EFCSN as the third-party and includes the link to the form.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 09/04/2023

Maldita does not offer a review of a complaint not satisfied after an internal complaint process. The link explains the standards defended by EFCSN. I wonder if there is not any internal debate; it seems that when there is a complaint it is not possible to seek review from an independent third-party.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 24/05/2023

This is a best practice.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Non Compliant

Date: 05/06/2023

It is not mandatory to evaluate nor fill out this point; it represents a best practice. However, the form doesn't work if I do not select any option. In this case it would be "not compliant"

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 06/06/2023

According to EFCSN, best practices if they are blank they will always be compliant.

Article 4.1: Organisational transparency

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

Proof of registration/legal status:

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 13/04/2023

The applicant complies with this standard.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 09/04/2023

The proof of registration is adequately attached in both cases (the foundation and the association). The official registration of the foundation is publicly disclosed.

Proof of ownership:

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 13/04/2023

The applicant complies with this standard.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 09/04/2023

There is not proof of ownership. It is reported that there are no shareholders.

Proof of governance structure:

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 13/04/2023

The applicant complies with this standard.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 09/04/2023

The proof of governance structure is adequately attached in both cases (the foundation and the association), and both are publicly disclosed.

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:

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 13/04/2023

The information provided is complete. No potential CoI are detected. The applicant complies with this standard.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 09/04/2023

Maldita shares its income publicly on the website and it reflects the same data on the application. There is only one forgotten organisation on the list of the web: ChequeaBolivia. It can be observed a varied source of income (46), and no source listed could be considered a conflict of interest. It is relevant that the main source of income is Meta (34,21% ). It would be interesting to know how many anonymous donors support the foundation.

Applicant

Compliant

Date: 24/05/2023

The work we did training and mentoring Chequea Bolivia was supported by Internews but it took place in 2020, that is why it isn't listed in our 2021 funding. https://maldita.es/nosotros/20210212/malditaes-colabora-con-chequeabolivia-con-tecnologia-capacitaciones-a-sus-periodistas-y-fortalecimiento-de-sus-procesos-de-verificacion/

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 05/06/2023

Thank you for this clarification

Applicant

Date: 10/01/2023

https://maldita.es/transparencia-organizacion/#:~:text=de%20la%20Fundaci%C3%B3n.-,Cuentas,-En%20la%20secci%C3%B3n

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 13/04/2023

On its website the applicant offers all the economic information in a easily accessible way. The applicant complies with this standard.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 09/04/2023

Regarding 2021, this information has been adequately disclosed on the applicant’s website: https://maldita.es/transparencia-organizacion/ The detail of the percentage is unknown in 2021 (it just shows more or less than 1%).
2022 economical data are updated till August 2022: https://maldita.es/malditas-cuentas-de-donde-vienen-donde-van-nuestros-ingresos/ The specific percentage appears as a visualization developed with Flourish.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 24/05/2023

In our understanding, the Code doesn’t require to show the percentage of all sources of income but just list those which are above 5%: “In that declaration, they will set out their main sources of income including but not necessarily restricted to those contributing over 5% of their annual income for the most recent annual accounts when joining and two previous annual accounts when renewing membership.” We’ve gone further than what the Code requires.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 05/06/2023

The review was not a criticism; it was a description of routines and data. In fact, the evaluation was "compliant"

Applicant

Date: 10/01/2023

https://maldita.es/transparencia-organizacion/#:~:text=Colaboraci%C3%B3n%2C%20comunidad%20y%20alianzas%20para%20acabar%20con%20la%20mentiraN/A

Charo Sadaba (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 13/04/2023

The commitments are duly listed on its website. The applicant complies with this standard.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 09/04/2023

The information provided is confused, including in that list paid and unpaid commitments (if we compare with the sources of income), and it seems that the applicant also stated "N/A".

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 24/05/2023

In the section “Colaboración, comunidad y alianzas para acabar con la mentira” we have listed the organisations towards which we have unpaid alliances either because we’re members or because we engage with them on specific topics for specific objectives. This doesn’t prevent us from having OTHER paid commitments that may appear in our list for sources of income.

Bella Palomo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 05/06/2023

Thank you for the information. I have changed the evaluation to "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.