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
Science Feedback
Website
https://science.feedback.orgDate
26/01/2024
Please, answer the following questions:
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
https://sciencefeedback.co/team-advisors-contributors/
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
In addition to these editorial activities, Science Feedback also prototyped a web platform to archive fact-checking data attached to the sources that published the claims. The data is intended to be shared with scientists studying misinformation, for instance, or with regulators interested in assessing the effectiveness of web platforms’ policies against misinformation. See https://open.feedback.org/. We intend to further work with the fact-checking community to develop a collaborative repository of fact-checked content.
Science Feedback is a signatory of the 2022 Code of Practice on Disinformation that has been instilled by the European Commission and an active member of its task-force. We meet with other task-force members on a weekly basis and work to encourage relevant actions from very large online platforms and search engine to promote reliable information.
Science Feedback also led investigations on misinformation on other platforms. To give just two examples, we led an analysis of 180k+ tweets to identify the most influential misinformation sharers on Twitter for the period covering late 2021-early 2022 and an investigation on the impact of the recent purchase of Twitter by Elon Musk on the engagement received by tweets from frequent sharers of misinformation.
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
- - Our organization is legally registered in France and we are actively involved in efforts by the European community of fact-checkers to address the problem of online misinformation. We are notably involved as a signatory and task force member of the European Code of Practice on Disinformation.
- - A substantial percentage (~15%) of our coverage concerns information made by sources in, originating from or viral in:
- - We have launched a French version of the Science Feedback website in 2022 to address viral claims that affect audiences in France. We are progressively ramping up the scope of this focus of ours (the list of articles we wrote in French can be found here: https://science.feedback.org/fr/reviews/)
- - In our partnership with TikTok, we cover the following languages: English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Russian, which are all widely spoken in Europe.
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 10/04/2023
It could of course be debated what makes a 'substantial and demonstrable focus' on Council of Europe countries. I am personally satisfied that the criteria at Q5 is met based on:
- the involvement of the applicant in the EU Commission's work on the Code of Practice,
- the fact that they are legally registered as a not-for-profit in France,
- the development of a new version of their website that specifically targets France,
- and the fact that they cover - among others - Council of Europe countries.
Applicant
Date: 28/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
- - We updated and made public our editorial standards and created a standalone page on our site to describe in one place the principles we follow to ensure our editorial independence.
- - We created a standalone page for our corrections policy (previously distributed across several pages) and listed all corrections from the previous year on that page.
- - We added an English version of our legal notice page. The page was only in French before, which satisfied local regulations.
- - We added information about our total income in a budget section on our funding page.
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: 09/02/2023
Laurent Bigot (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 08/05/2023
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 01/07/2023
Laurent Bigot (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 24/08/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 17/04/2023
In the interest of transparency, and given that the applicant is a partner to two majour social media companies, it would be interesting that the applicant make it clear if/when individual fact-checks have been made at the request of social media partners.
(to be clear, the applicant has an explanation about their partnership with Meta: https://sciencefeedback.co/science-feedback-partnering-with-facebook-in-fight-against-misinformation/)
Applicant
Compliant
Date: 01/07/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
- - in our Methodology Page (in the first section, where readers are encouraged to submit items for review),
- - from any page in the footer, as well as
- - at the bottom of every review.
Laurent Bigot (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 08/05/2023
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 01/07/2023
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.
Laurent Bigot (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 08/05/2023
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 01/07/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 17/04/2023
I also note that the applicants mention their contribution under the EU Disinformation Code on their website (linking to https://disinfocode.eu/signatory-report/science-feedback/?chapter=executive-summary) - i wonder if that could serve as a measure of impact here?
Applicant
Compliant
Date: 01/07/2023
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: 09/02/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 17/04/2023
In the webpage about editorial independence, the focus is on independence from the political sphere. I would suggest that a fact-checker focussing on science and climate change should also make it very clear that they want to be — and are — independent from private interests in industrial sectors and the science world (universities owning patterns or research contracts, companies, etc). To be clear, the editorial standards deal with conflicts of interest (at para 11) but I believe it should also be made clear in the section on editorial independence.
I would make the same observation about partnerships with social media platforms (Meta and TikTok): these are listed among the importand funders of the applicant, so it would make sense to have some additional clarity in the section on editorial independence on how the applicant ensures that it remains independent from powerful partners.
Applicant
Compliant
Date: 01/07/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
The selection of fact-checks below show that we review claims from individuals and groups from across the political spectrum, from the “left” to the “right” based on services such as Media Bias/Fact Check or Ad Fontes Media. Depending on the claim, the type of evidence we examine may differ. For example, reviewing a claim about a study on the effectiveness of face masks involved interviewing the study authors and experts unrelated to the study, while claims about statistics (such as mortality rates) involve examining epidemiological databases. Despite the differences, these approaches are all rooted in our evidence-based methodology, that is, examining the veracity of a claim based on the evidence, regardless of where the claim comes from.
- 1 https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/mask-wearing-reduce-spread-covid-19-social-media-posts-misinterpreted-annals-internal-medicine-study-n95-masks/
- 2 https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/study-brings-new-but-not-conclusive-evidence-on-the-comparative-effectiveness-of-infection-induced-and-vaccine-induced-immunity/
- 3 https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/people-can-sue-manufacturers-for-injury-following-routine-childhood-vaccines-contrary-to-claim-robert-kennedy-jr/
- 4 https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/new-highly-virulent-hiv-variant-named-vb-identified-in-the-netherlands-daily-mail/
- 5 https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/inaccurate-clickbait-headline-forbes-article-used-to-promote-false-claim-that-covid-19-vaccines-change-our-dna/
- 6 https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/new-york-magazine-article-on-childrens-risks-from-covid-19-is-accurate-but-more-context-regarding-difference-in-risk-between-young-and-older-children-would-be-helpful/
- 7 https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/medical-exemptions-covid-19-vaccines-granted-contraindications-not-including-blood-clots-adverse-reaction-prior-vaccine-dan-bongino/
- 8 https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/evidence-suggests-political-partisanship-associated-with-higher-covid-19-mortality-rates-among-republicans-compared-to-democrats/
- 9 https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/tweet-by-nyc-department-health-mental-hygiene-misinterpreted-no-evidence-xbb15-preferentially-infects-vaccinated-people/
- 10 https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/cdcs-covid-data-tracker-deaths-downward-reliable-data-still-indicate-covid-19-major-cause-of-death/
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 17/04/2023
However, in the interest of transparency, it would be helpful to ensure the exhaustivity of information in the biographies about other positions of staff - for instance, the founder and director appears to be affiliated with the academic institution Sciences Po Médialab, a fact that would be worthy of mentioning.
Applicant
Compliant
Date: 01/07/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
In a review of a claim that abortion is never medically necessary to save a woman’s life, it came to light that two medical experts we’d interviewed were members of pro-choice organizations, and thus their comments could potentially be biased.
As such, we updated the review to disclose the conflict of interest that these two experts had. And bearing in mind that having a conflict of interest doesn’t automatically mean that what an expert says is false, we also turned to examining medical cases in which women who’d developed complications during pregnancy were denied an abortion and later died from those complications.
We ultimately concluded that despite their conflict of interest, the two doctors’ comments were consistent with the medical evidence, and that the claim was simply inconsistent with what was happening in real life. We chose to stand by our original verdict.
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 17/04/2023
There is more substance in para 11 of the page on editorial standards. As mentioned above, I would welcome more clarity on the fact that conflicts of interest are also defined in relation to industrial sectors (there's a couple of examples in para 11, both relevant, but there could be a more general and exhaustive definition of a conflict of interest).
Also, it could be helpful to define who makes a decision (and how) when a conflict of interest within the editorial board/staff is reported.
In practice, the applicants' practices appear to be sound and ethical (i haven't spotted, in random samples and the articles linked by the applicants, any reason to be suspicious).
Applicant
Compliant
Date: 01/07/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
These policies are linked to from our About page, which is easily available from any page of our websites.
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
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: 09/02/2023
However, we do include the names and photos of the individual(s) who made the claim being fact-checked, if they are prominent individuals. These include politicians, celebrities, and individuals who have a significant online following numbering in the thousands like podcasters and social media influencers.
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
In our reviews that assess a claim associated with a particular scientific study for instance, we typically reach out to the study’s authors in order to obtain their views on whether the claim is accurate. In cases where there is ambiguity regarding how a claim should be interpreted, we reach out to the individual who made the claim in order to obtain a clarification.
It is not unusual for us to fact-check claims that have been refuted many times (e.g. the claims that vaccines cause autism, COVID-19 vaccines are killing people en masse, that the Earth is flat, or that humans are not the main cause of current climate change). In these cases, we don’t reach out to the author(s) for clarification, as the bulk of the scientific evidence has established that such claims are baseless. We do not consider reaching out to the claim’s author(s) to be meaningful or relevant in such cases.
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: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
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: 09/02/2023
Laurent Bigot (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 08/05/2023
Applicant
Compliant
Date: 01/07/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 19/04/2023
"If the erroneous publication was shared on social media, we will ensure that the correction is published on the same platforms as the erroneous publication.
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Text of the update:
UPDATE (23 December 2022):
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
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: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 19/04/2023
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: 09/02/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 19/04/2023
(the applicant provides a general description of their partnership with Meta: https://sciencefeedback.co/science-feedback-partnering-with-facebook-in-fight-against-misinformation/)
Applicant
Compliant
Date: 01/07/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 11/07/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Laurent Bigot (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 08/05/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 19/04/2023
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 01/07/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 11/07/2023
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 20/09/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 21/09/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 19/04/2023
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 01/07/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 11/07/2023
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 20/09/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 21/09/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 19/04/2023
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 01/07/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 11/07/2023
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 20/09/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 21/09/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Laurent Bigot (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 08/05/2023
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 01/07/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 19/04/2023
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 01/07/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 11/07/2023
The 'statuts' under French law are part of what is meant under 'bylaws' and should be publicly accessible on the website of the applicant.
Actually, in France, the 'statuts' are public information, but at present French public service offers no possibility to consult them online. I also note that other applicants from France have made their 'statuts' available on their website.
EFCSN also confirmed to me that the assessor should not disclose their identity to the applicant during the process.
I thus believe that the applicant needs to publicly disclose their 'statuts' on their website. It is actually the final pending point in this assessment.
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 20/09/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 21/09/2023
I have now marked this as compliant.
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:
Laurent Bigot (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 08/05/2023
The Science Feedback team does not give on its website the amounts of its main sources of income greater than 5% of its annual income.
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 01/07/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 19/04/2023
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 01/07/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 11/07/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Laurent Bigot (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 08/05/2023
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 01/07/2023
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 19/04/2023
Applicant
Needs more info
Date: 01/07/2023
2022
- Ashoka Fellowship
- European Media and Information Fund (EMIF) grant
- Facebook 3rd party fact-checking program
- IFCN Climate Misinformation Grant Program
- Individual donations
- TikTok 3rd party fact-checking program
Pierre François Docquir (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 29/08/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
We received pro-bono work in 2019 to develop Science Feedback business plan and fundraising from Roland Berger consulting.
Applicant
Date: 09/02/2023
We received pro-bono work in 2019 to develop Science Feedback business plan and fundraising from Roland Berger consulting.
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: 09/02/2023