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
TjekDet
Website
https://www.tjekdet.dk/Date
27/07/2023
Please, answer the following questions:
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
TjekDet.dk was launched in November 2016 by its former owner Mandag Morgen ApS - a commercial media company. This happened at a time when fake news became a broadly discussed issue in the public democratic debate - especially in connection with the American presidential election in 2016. Mandag Morgen ApS took on the task of establishing the first and presently still only fact-checking media in Denmark as a free public service-initiative. Today, TjekDet is owned by the independent non-profit association Foreningen TjekDet.
TjekDet was in 2016 and still is the only journalistic media solely dedicated fact-checking and an educational effort regarding misinformation, disinformation and malinformation.
https://www.tjekdet.dk/
TjekDet was in 2016 and still is the only journalistic media solely dedicated fact-checking and an educational effort regarding misinformation, disinformation and malinformation.
https://www.tjekdet.dk/
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 24/03/2023
TjekDet is Denmark's only journaslistic fact-checking organisation. Since its launch in 2016, TjekDet has become a well-established and to my kbowledge well-trusted independant and non-profit fact-checking organisation.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
At the time of submitting this application, the organization has five full-time, paid employees - consisting of one editor-in-chief and four journalists, one of the latter also has daily editorial responsibility. No volunteers – except for the five members of the board.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
The purpose of the organization is to operate the fact-checking media TjekDet. Besides doing pre- and debunking this also includes access to reference databases with educational and scientific materials about/on misinformation, disinformation and malinformation. This includes both own developed material and material developed by other relevant external actors in primarily Denmark. The organization have paid lecture and course activities, which is typically organized by educational institutions, libraries, as well as other organizations and projects that operate within media literacy. The content of the activities is primarily educational in nature - how to spot false information etc. Finally, the organization is a part of Facebooks Third-Party Fact-checking program.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
During the first quarter of 2023, the organization is expected to scale up its editorial staff and activity. Furthermore, in 2023 a revised strategy will be further implemented. However, the strategy has not changed the overall vision, but introduces some new goals and focus points, and generally ensuring that the choice of claims and the dissemination thereof have broad public interest in the age group of 15 years and over. Finally, the editorial output will consist to a greater extent of visual communication (videos).
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
TjekDet's geographical focus is Denmark (EU-member) and all Danes aged 15 or over. This means that all fact-checks are based on claims that abound in the Danish public debate - as a general rule, regardless of platform and sender, but taking into account the media's editorial methodology.
Applicant
Date: 13/01/2023
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
The code of ethics has been revised to a lesser extent, where it is further specified that employees must not have other employment that could compromise the organisation's independence.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 24/03/2023
All in all. it is my assessment that TjekDet on all significant matters comply with the standards. There are, however, a few instances where I think there is need for more information and perhaps additional revisions of TjekDet’s guidelines. This relates to article 2.h on uses of anonymous sources, article 3.2.F on measures that aim to address the risk of trauma or harassment experienced by staff, and articles 3.3.B-C on correction policy.
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
https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#saadanfaktatjekkervi
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 17/03/2023
The methodological procedure is clearly described, with accounts of types of claims that TjekDet fact-checks and what is considered a checkable claim. Two fact-checkers are always involved in the production of a fact-check, and the methodological procedure describes the types of sources normally consulted. Transparency is a keyword in how the fact-checks are to be written, including with links to all sources used. However, the written procedure does not include any further information on how fact-checks should be written and published.
A review of a few fact-checks shows that they comply well with the procedure described. They are also written in the same fashion, with bullet points addressing the claim and the conclusion of the fact-check first, before the actual fact-check, with links and references all sources. However, not all fact-checks seem to be produced by two fact-checkers or more, as the procedure describes. Some list only one fact-checker in the byline, like this fact-check: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/intet-tyder-paa-irans-berygtede-moralpoliti-er-blevet-oploest
A review of a few fact-checks shows that they comply well with the procedure described. They are also written in the same fashion, with bullet points addressing the claim and the conclusion of the fact-check first, before the actual fact-check, with links and references all sources. However, not all fact-checks seem to be produced by two fact-checkers or more, as the procedure describes. Some list only one fact-checker in the byline, like this fact-check: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/intet-tyder-paa-irans-berygtede-moralpoliti-er-blevet-oploest
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 17/03/2023
The procedure does not explicitly state that claims from different sides of the political spectrum or claims on different political topics should be assessed according to the same standard. However, the procedure applies to all fact-checks and does not describe different procedures for different topics and claims. Also, the ethical guidelines state that independence is a core value for TjekDet and that they don't take side in political questions.
- A review of a few fact-checks of claims from different sides of the political spectrum shows that the same standards apply:
- A fact-check of a claim made by the minister of culture (with the social democratic party): https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/kulturministeren-kan-i-udgangspunktet-ikke-rejse-til-qatar-men-den-situation-har-hun-selv
- A fact-check of claim made by a politician with the far-right part “Dansk Folkeparti”: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/lokal-df-politiker-undrer-sig-over-indvandrere-faar-hoejere-ydelser-end-pensionister-men
Morten Skovsgaard (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 31/05/2023
The methodology is not only clearly described, it is also applied extremely consistently across different types of fact checks on both sides of the political spectrum as well as in non-political cases.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
It is clearly stated in the vision and mission statements that the editorial content must "strengthen the democratic conversation in Denmark," meaning the editors must investigate claims that have close relevance to as many Danes over the age of 15 as possible and which has a significant impact on the individual Danes' ability to navigate the public democratic debate.
Also the value base of the organization instructs to "prioritize and convey stories that are relevant to Danes' everyday life and insight into their role as participants in the democratic debate". Under normal circumstances this precludes fact-checking claims of satirical nature, sports and entertainment.
Finally, the etablished editorial methodology, which can be found on the website here https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#saadanfaktatjekkervi, defines four clear conditions for when the editorial staff can choose to investigate a claim. These are, among other things, (1) There must be a clear claim, (2) The claim must be significant in relation to keeping the public debate on a topic on the factual track, (3) The claim must have initially gained greater attention. This also means that the editors must refrain from fact-checking claims that are relevant and important to a very limited segment only.
Also the value base of the organization instructs to "prioritize and convey stories that are relevant to Danes' everyday life and insight into their role as participants in the democratic debate". Under normal circumstances this precludes fact-checking claims of satirical nature, sports and entertainment.
Finally, the etablished editorial methodology, which can be found on the website here https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#saadanfaktatjekkervi, defines four clear conditions for when the editorial staff can choose to investigate a claim. These are, among other things, (1) There must be a clear claim, (2) The claim must be significant in relation to keeping the public debate on a topic on the factual track, (3) The claim must have initially gained greater attention. This also means that the editors must refrain from fact-checking claims that are relevant and important to a very limited segment only.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 17/03/2023
The methodological procedure clearly states that claims should be significant to be fact-checked. This applies both to the person, organization or body issuing the claim (who should have a public standing of importance), and to the claim itself (which should have had an impact in the public sphere, and which should treat a significant topic). The list of fact-checks at the web site seems to comply well with this procedure. I have not come across a fact-check that treats what could be said to be an insignificant claim. Also, the significance of the claims is often explained in the fact-checks, often in terms of it spread in social or legacy media.
However, there are some examples of fact-checked claims from ordinary citizens with no public standing, but the rational for such fact-checks is then explained by the significant spread of the claim and by the significance of the topic. An example of this is the following fact-check of a claim made by and un-identified Facebook-user on high levels of radiation from electric cars: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/et-misforstaaet-punktum-udloeser-alarmerende-hoej-tesla-straaling
However, there are some examples of fact-checked claims from ordinary citizens with no public standing, but the rational for such fact-checks is then explained by the significant spread of the claim and by the significance of the topic. An example of this is the following fact-check of a claim made by and un-identified Facebook-user on high levels of radiation from electric cars: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/et-misforstaaet-punktum-udloeser-alarmerende-hoej-tesla-straaling
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
The public can find access to a tip-us-form by clicking on the menu icon in the upper right corner (first choice on the list). https://www.tjekdet.dk/tip-os
The page also provides various email addresses and telephone numbers for the editors.
Also, in our vision and mission statement (http://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os) it is stated:
(QUOTATION): "Our readers are truth hunters - We can only reach our goals with your help. We are ready to check out a claim, statement or message you have heard or seen in the public debate. And if you have even researched the matter, we also very much welcome your material. We want to involve all readers in the process, and call to help us increase the quality of public debate by fact-checking. Tip us at the email address [email protected] or via our special tip form here, where tips can also be submitted anonymously. We carefully evaluate each tip, including whether these meet our ethical and general editorial guidelines for when we want and can fact-check a claim. If the necessary requirements are not met, the editors will refrain from fact checking the claim. You can read more about these requirements below". (END OF QUOTATION). Various e-mail addresses are provided as well as a link to a tip-form: https://www.tjekdet.dk/tip-os
The page also provides various email addresses and telephone numbers for the editors.
Also, in our vision and mission statement (http://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os) it is stated:
(QUOTATION): "Our readers are truth hunters - We can only reach our goals with your help. We are ready to check out a claim, statement or message you have heard or seen in the public debate. And if you have even researched the matter, we also very much welcome your material. We want to involve all readers in the process, and call to help us increase the quality of public debate by fact-checking. Tip us at the email address [email protected] or via our special tip form here, where tips can also be submitted anonymously. We carefully evaluate each tip, including whether these meet our ethical and general editorial guidelines for when we want and can fact-check a claim. If the necessary requirements are not met, the editors will refrain from fact checking the claim. You can read more about these requirements below". (END OF QUOTATION). Various e-mail addresses are provided as well as a link to a tip-form: https://www.tjekdet.dk/tip-os
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 17/03/2023
TjekDet has a portal through which users can submit tipis on claims to fact-checked. This portal has clear guidelines on what can be fact-checked, where the claim was found, etc. It also links to the published methodological procedure. Contact information to the newsroom is also provided as part of the portal.
Here is the link to the portal: https://www.tjekdet.dk/tip-os
Morten Skovsgaard (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 31/05/2023
Clearly compliant, but it would be even more user-friendly to have the tip us-link in the top bar of the front page (landing page) next to "Om os".
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 17/03/2023
The methodological procedure highlights transparency as a key value and guideline for the fact-checking practice. The procedure clearly states that all sources should be linked to or in other ways made available to the public. The fact-checks comply well with this procedure, with links to all online sources and pictures or detailed reference to offline sources.
Morten Skovsgaard (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 31/05/2023
Tjekdet.dk includes hyperlinks to all central pieces of information concerning the fact checks across the sampled fact checks. It is easy to trace the information that they build their conclusions on, or in principal contact (expert) sources that they have spoken to.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 19/03/2023
The methdological procedure states that fact-checks should be based on at least to independant expert sources, and that fact-checks should always try to uncover factual naunces and contraditing evidence, if any such exists. The procedure does not lay out principles for sourcing practices related to background sources or how sources should be presented.
A review of fact-checks shows that ThjekDet's standard procedure is to link to or to other ways make transparant all relevant sources and background information that the fact-checks are based on. They also provide nuanced conclusion when factual evidence is difficult to find, for instance in this fact-check of wether a manipulated image of Russian president Plutin is band in Russia or not.
However, sometimes links to relevant source material are not presented in the most transparent way. TjekDet has a tendency to write for instance "in a Facebook post..." where the words "Facebook post" are hyperlinked. This is fine as long as the link works, but I think a better practice would be to make transparent in the actual fact-check who has written the post, when and in which context it was posted, etc. Facebook posts (and other online sources) could be removed, have their url changed, etc, so that over time the links might die. And then it can become difficult to assess what fact-checks are based on. TjekDet does however quite often provide screen shots of such online content, which partly solves the problem, but I still think it is good practice to provide more detail on the linked-to sources in the running text.
A review of fact-checks shows that ThjekDet's standard procedure is to link to or to other ways make transparant all relevant sources and background information that the fact-checks are based on. They also provide nuanced conclusion when factual evidence is difficult to find, for instance in this fact-check of wether a manipulated image of Russian president Plutin is band in Russia or not.
However, sometimes links to relevant source material are not presented in the most transparent way. TjekDet has a tendency to write for instance "in a Facebook post..." where the words "Facebook post" are hyperlinked. This is fine as long as the link works, but I think a better practice would be to make transparent in the actual fact-check who has written the post, when and in which context it was posted, etc. Facebook posts (and other online sources) could be removed, have their url changed, etc, so that over time the links might die. And then it can become difficult to assess what fact-checks are based on. TjekDet does however quite often provide screen shots of such online content, which partly solves the problem, but I still think it is good practice to provide more detail on the linked-to sources in the running text.
Morten Skovsgaard (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 31/05/2023
As stated in their mission and vision, tjekdet.dk includes evidence and details that add nuance to the fact check across the sampled fact checks.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 19/03/2023
The methodological procedure states that all fact-checks should be based on at least two sources, and that the sources should be “researchers or other primary sources, who have in-depth knowledge on the topic of the claim and who can present factual scientific or other well-assessed documentation”. The methodological procedure does not lay out principles for how secondary sources should be presented or used.
A review of some fact-checks shows that TjekDet’s practice complies well with their written procedure, and that both primary and secondary sources are presented in a satisfactory way. I have not come across any instances where TjekDet uses only secondary sources or too few sources.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 19/03/2023
The methodological procedure does not explicitly state that all sources should be named, and it does not include principles for if and when anonymous sources can be used. But the procedure includes a general principle of transparency, which states that TjekDet should always link to sources and provide background information on sources.
A review of some fact-checks reveals that TjekDet sometimes uses anonymous sources, for instance when they refer to social media posts published by ordinary citizens with no public standing. An example is this fact-check, which refers to “several Facebook posts” and includes a screen shot of a Facebook post where the poster’s name is anonymized. This fact-check does not include information on why the poster’s name is anonymized.
Such examples, and the lack of guidelines on how and when to anonymize sources, makes me conclude that on this point, I would like to see some more information from TjekDet. I might have missed some information, and if that is the case, I do apologize. See also my evaluation of how TjekDet complies with article 3.2.
Assessor
Needs more info
Date: 22/06/2023
The rules for source protection are stated in the Danish press ethics guidelines, which TjekDet has endorsed. On the page about our methodology, we quote the following press ethics rule, which encompasses three aspects: We must consider (1) the individual's demand for respect for personal integrity, (2) the right to privacy, and (3) the need for protection against unwarranted infringement. https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#saadanfaktatjekkervi
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 09/07/2023
That's all good, but this press ethics rule does not say anything explicit about anonymisation, even though anonymisation is a logical way to adhere to this rule. To apply to 2H you should probably add something explicit about when and how it is appropriate to use anonymous sources in your methodological guidelines. But I have no doubt to you in practice do this in a satisfactory way, so I am happy to mark this as “compliant”.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 19/03/2023
The methodological procedure states that background information about sources should be presented. Many of TjekDet’s fact-checks are based on documentation from expert sources like researchers, and these are always presented with their full title, field of expertise and work place. However, it does occur that when TjekDet refers to research from foreign sources, they do not always present such background information. An example is this fact-check which refers to “research from Australia” without any further information about who these researchers are. However, this is a rare case and the Australian research, which is linked to, is only used as a secondary source in the fact-check. Still, it points to a potential risk that it sometimes might feel less necessary to provide background information on foreign sources which do not play a primary role in the fact-check.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 19/03/2023
The methodlogical procedure states that a fact-check, as a general rule, should be produced by at least "two journalists", and that each fact-check should be checked by "at least one person in the newsroom, who has not been involved in the preceeding process". I have no reason to doubt that TjekDet's practice follows this procedure, even though I, as previously mentiuoned, have come across fact-checks with only one person listed in the byline.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 19/03/2023
I find that ThekDet's fact-checks are written in a precise, factual and non-emotive language, and that conclusions are carefully written and nuanced when necessary.
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.
Assessor
Non Compliant
Date: 22/06/2023
Currently, we do not follow this best practice.
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
This is directly and indirectly regulated in several ways:
1. It is stated that the legal status of the organization is an independent association, and reference is made to the company register, which confirms this status: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#ejerforhold
2. The organisation is registered as an independent association meaning its purpose is not to generate profits for companies or individuals. All funds must be used for the operation: https://www.tjekdet.dk/oekonomi
3. Since the association's 'owners' are the members, a safeguard mechanism is built into the articles of association in the form of an admission procedure, which are to ensure that the association does not admit members who may have an obvious agenda - be it of a political, economic or similar nature - which may compromise the association's independence or operation in general, cf. first sentence in §5 of the bylaws of the association and §5.4. https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#vedt%C3%A6gter
4. The association's articles of association §5.5 sets an amount limit for how much money the organization may receive in the form of unsolicited donations. https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#vedt%C3%A6gter
5. The organisation only seeks and only receives funding that in no way demand, can or will compromise or influence the media's editorial independence. This is proven through extended transparency of what concerns funding, where possible concrete documentation from a contributor is referred to and presented. https://www.tjekdet.dk/oekonomi
1. It is stated that the legal status of the organization is an independent association, and reference is made to the company register, which confirms this status: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#ejerforhold
2. The organisation is registered as an independent association meaning its purpose is not to generate profits for companies or individuals. All funds must be used for the operation: https://www.tjekdet.dk/oekonomi
3. Since the association's 'owners' are the members, a safeguard mechanism is built into the articles of association in the form of an admission procedure, which are to ensure that the association does not admit members who may have an obvious agenda - be it of a political, economic or similar nature - which may compromise the association's independence or operation in general, cf. first sentence in §5 of the bylaws of the association and §5.4. https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#vedt%C3%A6gter
4. The association's articles of association §5.5 sets an amount limit for how much money the organization may receive in the form of unsolicited donations. https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#vedt%C3%A6gter
5. The organisation only seeks and only receives funding that in no way demand, can or will compromise or influence the media's editorial independence. This is proven through extended transparency of what concerns funding, where possible concrete documentation from a contributor is referred to and presented. https://www.tjekdet.dk/oekonomi
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 24/03/2023
It is my evaluation that TjekDet complies well with this standard.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
This is regulated by the association's value base and ethical guidelines, where it is stated, among other things, that "we do not take a political position and do not undertake activities or act in a way that may cast doubt on our independence and impartiality". Cf. https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 19/03/2023
As stated in the application, TjekDet's ethical guidelines state that they do not take political positions and that they act independent of political interests. I have not come across anything in their practice that leads to any doubt related to this.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
The organisation only seeks and only receives funding that in no way demand, can or will compromise or influence the media's editorial independence. This is proven through extended transparency of what concerns funding, where possible concrete documentation from a contributor is referred to and presented. https://www.tjekdet.dk/oekonomi
Furthermore, the association's bylaws sets an amount limit for how much money the organization may receive in the form of unsolicited donations. https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#vedt%C3%A6gter
Finally, the organisation's value base states, among other things: "we do not take a political position and do not undertake activities or act in a way that may cast doubt on our independence and impartiality." https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet
Furthermore, the association's bylaws sets an amount limit for how much money the organization may receive in the form of unsolicited donations. https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#vedt%C3%A6gter
Finally, the organisation's value base states, among other things: "we do not take a political position and do not undertake activities or act in a way that may cast doubt on our independence and impartiality." https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 19/03/2023
I have not come across anything that leads to any doubt regarding TjekDet's policy on this issue. The ownership structure, partnerships, and the financial information are provided on TjekDet's website, as stated in the application.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
The organisation's value base states, among other things: "we do not take a political position and do not undertake activities or act in a way that may cast doubt on our independence and impartiality." https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet
In addition, the organization continuously maintains publicly available statistics that account for the distribution of fact checks on political parties and politicians. https://www.tjekdet.dk/statistik-paa-politiske-faktatjek
Clearly, the statistic does reflect that some parties have more seats in parliament - and the potential number of claims made might therefore be higher of what concerns these parties. Furthermore, parties that hold government power will more often be subject to fact-checking, cf. the role of the media as a critical watchdog towards those in power. But the current statistic does, however, reflect that the editorial prioritization is not biased towards a specific political wing.
Examples:
1. "Boycott or visit: Is the Minister of Culture right that she cannot go to Qatar?" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/kulturministeren-kan-i-udgangspunktet-ikke-rejse-til-qatar-men-den-situation-har-hun-selv
Comment: In the period leading up to the football world championship in Qatar, harsh criticism of the conditions, not least for migrant workers in Qatar, has been circulating, particularly from political circles. At the same time, it has triggered opposite misinformation in favor of the government in Qatar. This fact-check is based on the the Danish Acting Culture Minister (Socialdemocrats) who claims that she cannot go to Qatar because Denmark did not have a formal government at the time, due to government negotiations were taking place after parliamentary elections. On the other hand, the political opposition is of the opinion that she is not excluded from being able to do so. By the way, when the fact check was started, it was thus not clear which political wing/party was right, which also means that from the beginning there was no political stance in the choice of the fact check. The conclusion is that in principle she cannot travel, but in practice she has a slight opportunity to do so anyway.
The article follows the general structure for our fact-checks. That is (1) a condensate of the claim, (2) presenting the claim holder(s), (3) description of how the claim has been put forward in the public democratic debate, (4) short conclusion, (5) In-depth explanation including at least two experts and presentation/reference to documentation where and when necessary, (6) The politician is invited to comment, which a party spokes person, however, declined.
2. "Yes, the ice is actually melting: 5,000 billion tons of ice have disappeared in Greenland in 20 years" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/5000-milliarder-ton-er-forsvundet-i-groenland-paa-20-aar
Comment: The (false) claim is based on a climate-skeptic environment.
The claim has In several similar-sounding Facebook posts, it is claimed that the Greenland ice sheet is not melting, but rather getting bigger - exactly the opposite of the common view of the world's climate experts. According to the posts, increased rainfall has made the ice cap thicker. But that is not correct. The statistics actually state that the ice in Greenland is shrinking. Over the past 20 years, 5,000 gigatons of ice have disappeared according to scietific data. The fact-check also reveals that an apparent image from NASA proves it. However, it is not a photo, but rather a graphic illustration that does not substantiate the claim. The article provides a thorough explanation of how the misunderstanding arises, describing a natural cycle. The article is thus an example of how the reader is not just served a simple conclusion, but instead is introduced to the technical explanation in comprehensible Danish. The article follows the general structure for our fact-checks. That is (1) a condensate of the claim, (2) presenting where the claim originates, (3) short conclusion, (4) In-depth explanation including at least two experts and presentation/reference to documentation where and when necessary, (6) Although the claim has circulated in more than one post, the fact-check finds the original claim holder, who naturally gets the possibility of commenting on the experts conclusion.
3. "Yes, the blades from wind turbines are buried, but why not recycle them?" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/ja-vingerne-fra-vindmoeller-bliver-rigtig-nok-gravet-ned-men-hvorfor-genbruger-man-dem
Comment: The (true) claim is based on a climate-skeptic post on social media. Unlike example 2, this fact check concludes that the climate skeptics are right.
This fact-check is slso an example of the importance of not only fact-checking false information, but also fact-check true claims. This applies not least when readers call for fact-checking, which is the case in this example. This article examines a viral claim that wind turbine blades are buried when they are scrapped. The claim was often accompanied by a picture where one allegedly sees a bulldozer burying wind turbine blades. TjekDet could tell readers that the claim and image are true. It became one of the most read articles on tjekdet.dk in 2022. The article follows the general structure for our fact-checks. That is (1) a condensate of the claim, (2) presenting the claim holder(s), (3) description of how the claim has been put forward in the public democratic debate, (4) short conclusion, (5) In-depth explanation including at least two experts and presentation/reference to documentation where and when necessary. In this case the claim was spread by thousands of people in individual posts, why it was not possible to appoint a specific claim holder. The article, therefore, does not contain criticism of a specific person or organisation.
4. "According to Franciska Rosenkilde, Alternative's proposal for an aid package will not increase inflation. But it's hard to say" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/ifoelge-franciska-rosenkilde-vil-alternativets-forslag-til-hjaelpepakke-ikke-oege
Comment: This fact-check investigates a (not documented) claim put forward by the party leader of the left-winged based The Alternative. The party leader said during a televised political debate that a proposal to help economically stressed Danes will not increase inflation, because consumption will not be increased either. But according to experts, there is no evidence to claim that this should be the case. Rather the opposite. The proposal will probably result in increased consumption, researchers says. The article follows the general structure for our fact-checks. That is (1) a condensate of the claim, (2) presenting the claim holder(s), (3) description of how the claim has been put forward in the public democratic debate, (4) short conclusion, (5) In-depth explanation including at least two experts and presentation/reference to documentation where and when necessary, (6) The politician is invited to comment, but despite several inquiries and a few days of waiting, TjekDet does not receive a reply from the party leader.
5. "Alex Vanoplagh says it takes six years to build a nuclear power plant. But it can easily take 10-15 years before it delivers power" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/alex-vanopslagh-siger-det-tager-seks-aar-bygge-et-atomkraftvaerk-men-der-kan-nemt-gaa-10
Comment: This is a fact-check of a claim stated by a party leader from the right wing in the Danish parliament (as opposed to example 4).
The current European energy crisis has been high on the agenda for the past several months among politicians and the "ordinary Dane" who is concerned about the private economy. For historical reasons, Denmark does not have nuclear power plants, but the political debate has been characterized by a growing desire for nuclear power plants to be the way forward, because in the long run it is cheap electricity and at the same time climate friendly. And it is a quick solution, another argument often goes. In this fact check, a politician claims that it takes an average of six years to build a nuclear power plant. The article makes sure to state that there are circumstances that speak both for and against the claim. While the claim is not wrong, it's also not the whole story - there is necessary context. Because if Denmark is to have a nuclear power plant, it will take many years of preparation and legislative changes. It is thus not "a quick fix", as history shows it can easily take 10-15 years from the initial phase until the power plant is ready and can supply power. Also this article follows the general structure for our fact-checks. That is (1) a condensate of the claim, (2) presenting the claim holder(s), (3) description of how the claim has been put forward in the public democratic debate, (4) short conclusion, (5) In-depth explanation including at least two experts and presentation/reference to documentation where and when necessary, (6) The politician is invited to comment, but despite several inquiries and a few days of waiting, TjekDet does not receive a reply from the party leader. This is probably due to the fact that the claim was put forward during parliamentary elections, where it is difficult for all journalists to get comments from politicians being bussy campaigning.
6. "Disconnected from reality? Most members of parliament have actually had a real job" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/de-fleste-folketingsmedlemmer-har-faktisk-haft-et-rigtigt-arbejde
Comment: This fact-check examines a viral claim that misinforms about the political establishment - regardless of political affiliation. The fact-check is neutral in its review and does not have a one-sided focus on politicians of a specific political standpoint.
Politicians are often accused on social media that they have never had a real job, but only have professional experience from positions in party organisations or no professional experience at all. This fact check is an example of the fact that (1) fact checkers can often produce the necessary basis for the conclusion in a fact check themselves (by collecting and processing data themselves) - and are thus not always dependent on researchers, (2) it is not 'just another' fact check which investigates a claim made by politicians, and (3) the fact-checking is based on painstaking work that ensures that the collected data is carefully examined so that no (unintentional) political bias occurs. Also this article follows the general structure for our fact-checks. That is (1) a condensate of the claim, (2) presenting the claim holder(s) - in this case, however, there is not a single claim holder, but a consistant claim circulating - (3) description of how the claim has been put forward, (4) short conclusion, (5) In-depth explanation which in this case includes carefully collected data. Since there is no clear claim holder nobody is presented with the conclusion of our fact-check - except from a politician who reacts to our findings. The politician is, however, not one of the claim holders.
7. "Vladimir Putin's mobilization did not lead to a 35 kilometer queue at the border with Finland" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/vladimir-putins-mobilisering-foerte-ikke-til-35-kilometer-lang-koe-ved-graensen-til
Comment: TjekDet as well as other fact-checking organizations worldwide have in 2022 repeatedly fact-checked disinformation (in most cases) put forward by Russia in connection with the Russian invasion of Ukraine. However, this fact check takes the opposite approach as it investigates a claim that there are very long queues at the Finnish border because Russian men are fleeing in droves from being called up for military service and sent to war in Ukraine. It is correct that Russian men have fled the country, several media reports show, but in this case a specific claim of a 35 kilometer long queue at the Russian-Finnish border is being investigated. And the conclusion is that the claim in this case is false. The Finnish border authority states that at that time there had not been such a large mass flight towards Finland. Again this article follows the general structure for our fact-checks.
8. "Why does Putin say he wants to "denazify" Ukraine?" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/hvorfor-siger-putin-han-vil-afnazificere-ukraine
Comment: As opposed to example 7 this article investigates a false claim made by the Russian president Vladimir Putin. The article investigates the Russian main argument for invading Ukraine accusing the government in Ukraine is Nazi and is committing genocide on the Russian-speaking part of the population. The article does not only seek to prove that the claim is false. The article carefully also explains how there are indeed Nazi sympathizers in Ukrainian society, but that this is no more widespread than in so many other countries. The article does not stop here, but also provides an in-depth explanation of Vladimir Putin's motivation for making the claim. This casts a perspective on the claim. The article follows the general structure for our fact-checks as defined above.
9. "Hocus pocus" math? Mette Frederiksen accuses Søren Pape of wanting to fire 40,000 public employees. But her documentation is lagging" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/mette-frederiksen-beskylder-soeren-pape-ville-fyre-40000-offentligt-ansatte-men-hendes
Comment: The fact-check investigates a claim stated by the Danish Socialdemocratic prime minister and her center-left government in 2022. Her claim aims to undermine a proposal from the right-wing Conservative party. While the article concludes that her claim is generally not documented, the article also contains nuances that support her claim. This is thus an article which, with the help of nuances, demonstrates the editorial team's desire to ensure political balance in the conclusion of the fact-check.
The article follows the general structure for our fact-checks: (1) A condensate of the claim, (2) presenting the claim holder(s), (3) description of how the claim has been put forward in the public democratic debate, (4) short conclusion upfront, (5) In-depth explanation including at least two experts and presentation/reference to documentation where and when necessary, (6) Both parties are offered to reply.
10. "Do unvaccinated young people lead dangerous lives? Søren Brostrøm thinks so, but researchers urge caution" https://www.tjekdet.dk/indsigt/lever-uvaccinerede-unge-livet-farligt-det-mener-soeren-brostroem-men-forskere-maner-til
Comment: While most corona-related fact-checks were investigating false claims about the virus and vaccines put forward by corona- and vaccine-skeptics, this example 10 shows that the editorial staff always has focused on fact-checking the health authorities during the pandemic.
"You live life dangerously as a young, unvaccinated Dane," said director of the Danish Health Authority Søren Brostrøm at a press conference about the corona situation. But researchers are skeptical of that interpretation and point out, among other things, that relatively few young people become seriously ill due to the coronavirus, and almost no one dies. A couple of months later the authorities recognizes that to a certain extent it was not expedient to vaccinate children and young people. The article follows the general structure for our fact-checks: (1) A condensate of the claim, (2) presenting the claim holder(s), (3) description of how the claim has been put forward in the public democratic debate, (4) short conclusion upfront, (5) In-depth explanation including at least two experts and presentation/reference to documentation where and when necessary, (6) The director of the Danish Health Authority is offered to reply, but where, however, it is his press office that answers succinctly.
In addition, the organization continuously maintains publicly available statistics that account for the distribution of fact checks on political parties and politicians. https://www.tjekdet.dk/statistik-paa-politiske-faktatjek
Clearly, the statistic does reflect that some parties have more seats in parliament - and the potential number of claims made might therefore be higher of what concerns these parties. Furthermore, parties that hold government power will more often be subject to fact-checking, cf. the role of the media as a critical watchdog towards those in power. But the current statistic does, however, reflect that the editorial prioritization is not biased towards a specific political wing.
Examples:
1. "Boycott or visit: Is the Minister of Culture right that she cannot go to Qatar?" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/kulturministeren-kan-i-udgangspunktet-ikke-rejse-til-qatar-men-den-situation-har-hun-selv
Comment: In the period leading up to the football world championship in Qatar, harsh criticism of the conditions, not least for migrant workers in Qatar, has been circulating, particularly from political circles. At the same time, it has triggered opposite misinformation in favor of the government in Qatar. This fact-check is based on the the Danish Acting Culture Minister (Socialdemocrats) who claims that she cannot go to Qatar because Denmark did not have a formal government at the time, due to government negotiations were taking place after parliamentary elections. On the other hand, the political opposition is of the opinion that she is not excluded from being able to do so. By the way, when the fact check was started, it was thus not clear which political wing/party was right, which also means that from the beginning there was no political stance in the choice of the fact check. The conclusion is that in principle she cannot travel, but in practice she has a slight opportunity to do so anyway.
The article follows the general structure for our fact-checks. That is (1) a condensate of the claim, (2) presenting the claim holder(s), (3) description of how the claim has been put forward in the public democratic debate, (4) short conclusion, (5) In-depth explanation including at least two experts and presentation/reference to documentation where and when necessary, (6) The politician is invited to comment, which a party spokes person, however, declined.
2. "Yes, the ice is actually melting: 5,000 billion tons of ice have disappeared in Greenland in 20 years" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/5000-milliarder-ton-er-forsvundet-i-groenland-paa-20-aar
Comment: The (false) claim is based on a climate-skeptic environment.
The claim has In several similar-sounding Facebook posts, it is claimed that the Greenland ice sheet is not melting, but rather getting bigger - exactly the opposite of the common view of the world's climate experts. According to the posts, increased rainfall has made the ice cap thicker. But that is not correct. The statistics actually state that the ice in Greenland is shrinking. Over the past 20 years, 5,000 gigatons of ice have disappeared according to scietific data. The fact-check also reveals that an apparent image from NASA proves it. However, it is not a photo, but rather a graphic illustration that does not substantiate the claim. The article provides a thorough explanation of how the misunderstanding arises, describing a natural cycle. The article is thus an example of how the reader is not just served a simple conclusion, but instead is introduced to the technical explanation in comprehensible Danish. The article follows the general structure for our fact-checks. That is (1) a condensate of the claim, (2) presenting where the claim originates, (3) short conclusion, (4) In-depth explanation including at least two experts and presentation/reference to documentation where and when necessary, (6) Although the claim has circulated in more than one post, the fact-check finds the original claim holder, who naturally gets the possibility of commenting on the experts conclusion.
3. "Yes, the blades from wind turbines are buried, but why not recycle them?" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/ja-vingerne-fra-vindmoeller-bliver-rigtig-nok-gravet-ned-men-hvorfor-genbruger-man-dem
Comment: The (true) claim is based on a climate-skeptic post on social media. Unlike example 2, this fact check concludes that the climate skeptics are right.
This fact-check is slso an example of the importance of not only fact-checking false information, but also fact-check true claims. This applies not least when readers call for fact-checking, which is the case in this example. This article examines a viral claim that wind turbine blades are buried when they are scrapped. The claim was often accompanied by a picture where one allegedly sees a bulldozer burying wind turbine blades. TjekDet could tell readers that the claim and image are true. It became one of the most read articles on tjekdet.dk in 2022. The article follows the general structure for our fact-checks. That is (1) a condensate of the claim, (2) presenting the claim holder(s), (3) description of how the claim has been put forward in the public democratic debate, (4) short conclusion, (5) In-depth explanation including at least two experts and presentation/reference to documentation where and when necessary. In this case the claim was spread by thousands of people in individual posts, why it was not possible to appoint a specific claim holder. The article, therefore, does not contain criticism of a specific person or organisation.
4. "According to Franciska Rosenkilde, Alternative's proposal for an aid package will not increase inflation. But it's hard to say" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/ifoelge-franciska-rosenkilde-vil-alternativets-forslag-til-hjaelpepakke-ikke-oege
Comment: This fact-check investigates a (not documented) claim put forward by the party leader of the left-winged based The Alternative. The party leader said during a televised political debate that a proposal to help economically stressed Danes will not increase inflation, because consumption will not be increased either. But according to experts, there is no evidence to claim that this should be the case. Rather the opposite. The proposal will probably result in increased consumption, researchers says. The article follows the general structure for our fact-checks. That is (1) a condensate of the claim, (2) presenting the claim holder(s), (3) description of how the claim has been put forward in the public democratic debate, (4) short conclusion, (5) In-depth explanation including at least two experts and presentation/reference to documentation where and when necessary, (6) The politician is invited to comment, but despite several inquiries and a few days of waiting, TjekDet does not receive a reply from the party leader.
5. "Alex Vanoplagh says it takes six years to build a nuclear power plant. But it can easily take 10-15 years before it delivers power" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/alex-vanopslagh-siger-det-tager-seks-aar-bygge-et-atomkraftvaerk-men-der-kan-nemt-gaa-10
Comment: This is a fact-check of a claim stated by a party leader from the right wing in the Danish parliament (as opposed to example 4).
The current European energy crisis has been high on the agenda for the past several months among politicians and the "ordinary Dane" who is concerned about the private economy. For historical reasons, Denmark does not have nuclear power plants, but the political debate has been characterized by a growing desire for nuclear power plants to be the way forward, because in the long run it is cheap electricity and at the same time climate friendly. And it is a quick solution, another argument often goes. In this fact check, a politician claims that it takes an average of six years to build a nuclear power plant. The article makes sure to state that there are circumstances that speak both for and against the claim. While the claim is not wrong, it's also not the whole story - there is necessary context. Because if Denmark is to have a nuclear power plant, it will take many years of preparation and legislative changes. It is thus not "a quick fix", as history shows it can easily take 10-15 years from the initial phase until the power plant is ready and can supply power. Also this article follows the general structure for our fact-checks. That is (1) a condensate of the claim, (2) presenting the claim holder(s), (3) description of how the claim has been put forward in the public democratic debate, (4) short conclusion, (5) In-depth explanation including at least two experts and presentation/reference to documentation where and when necessary, (6) The politician is invited to comment, but despite several inquiries and a few days of waiting, TjekDet does not receive a reply from the party leader. This is probably due to the fact that the claim was put forward during parliamentary elections, where it is difficult for all journalists to get comments from politicians being bussy campaigning.
6. "Disconnected from reality? Most members of parliament have actually had a real job" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/de-fleste-folketingsmedlemmer-har-faktisk-haft-et-rigtigt-arbejde
Comment: This fact-check examines a viral claim that misinforms about the political establishment - regardless of political affiliation. The fact-check is neutral in its review and does not have a one-sided focus on politicians of a specific political standpoint.
Politicians are often accused on social media that they have never had a real job, but only have professional experience from positions in party organisations or no professional experience at all. This fact check is an example of the fact that (1) fact checkers can often produce the necessary basis for the conclusion in a fact check themselves (by collecting and processing data themselves) - and are thus not always dependent on researchers, (2) it is not 'just another' fact check which investigates a claim made by politicians, and (3) the fact-checking is based on painstaking work that ensures that the collected data is carefully examined so that no (unintentional) political bias occurs. Also this article follows the general structure for our fact-checks. That is (1) a condensate of the claim, (2) presenting the claim holder(s) - in this case, however, there is not a single claim holder, but a consistant claim circulating - (3) description of how the claim has been put forward, (4) short conclusion, (5) In-depth explanation which in this case includes carefully collected data. Since there is no clear claim holder nobody is presented with the conclusion of our fact-check - except from a politician who reacts to our findings. The politician is, however, not one of the claim holders.
7. "Vladimir Putin's mobilization did not lead to a 35 kilometer queue at the border with Finland" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/vladimir-putins-mobilisering-foerte-ikke-til-35-kilometer-lang-koe-ved-graensen-til
Comment: TjekDet as well as other fact-checking organizations worldwide have in 2022 repeatedly fact-checked disinformation (in most cases) put forward by Russia in connection with the Russian invasion of Ukraine. However, this fact check takes the opposite approach as it investigates a claim that there are very long queues at the Finnish border because Russian men are fleeing in droves from being called up for military service and sent to war in Ukraine. It is correct that Russian men have fled the country, several media reports show, but in this case a specific claim of a 35 kilometer long queue at the Russian-Finnish border is being investigated. And the conclusion is that the claim in this case is false. The Finnish border authority states that at that time there had not been such a large mass flight towards Finland. Again this article follows the general structure for our fact-checks.
8. "Why does Putin say he wants to "denazify" Ukraine?" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/hvorfor-siger-putin-han-vil-afnazificere-ukraine
Comment: As opposed to example 7 this article investigates a false claim made by the Russian president Vladimir Putin. The article investigates the Russian main argument for invading Ukraine accusing the government in Ukraine is Nazi and is committing genocide on the Russian-speaking part of the population. The article does not only seek to prove that the claim is false. The article carefully also explains how there are indeed Nazi sympathizers in Ukrainian society, but that this is no more widespread than in so many other countries. The article does not stop here, but also provides an in-depth explanation of Vladimir Putin's motivation for making the claim. This casts a perspective on the claim. The article follows the general structure for our fact-checks as defined above.
9. "Hocus pocus" math? Mette Frederiksen accuses Søren Pape of wanting to fire 40,000 public employees. But her documentation is lagging" https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/mette-frederiksen-beskylder-soeren-pape-ville-fyre-40000-offentligt-ansatte-men-hendes
Comment: The fact-check investigates a claim stated by the Danish Socialdemocratic prime minister and her center-left government in 2022. Her claim aims to undermine a proposal from the right-wing Conservative party. While the article concludes that her claim is generally not documented, the article also contains nuances that support her claim. This is thus an article which, with the help of nuances, demonstrates the editorial team's desire to ensure political balance in the conclusion of the fact-check.
The article follows the general structure for our fact-checks: (1) A condensate of the claim, (2) presenting the claim holder(s), (3) description of how the claim has been put forward in the public democratic debate, (4) short conclusion upfront, (5) In-depth explanation including at least two experts and presentation/reference to documentation where and when necessary, (6) Both parties are offered to reply.
10. "Do unvaccinated young people lead dangerous lives? Søren Brostrøm thinks so, but researchers urge caution" https://www.tjekdet.dk/indsigt/lever-uvaccinerede-unge-livet-farligt-det-mener-soeren-brostroem-men-forskere-maner-til
Comment: While most corona-related fact-checks were investigating false claims about the virus and vaccines put forward by corona- and vaccine-skeptics, this example 10 shows that the editorial staff always has focused on fact-checking the health authorities during the pandemic.
"You live life dangerously as a young, unvaccinated Dane," said director of the Danish Health Authority Søren Brostrøm at a press conference about the corona situation. But researchers are skeptical of that interpretation and point out, among other things, that relatively few young people become seriously ill due to the coronavirus, and almost no one dies. A couple of months later the authorities recognizes that to a certain extent it was not expedient to vaccinate children and young people. The article follows the general structure for our fact-checks: (1) A condensate of the claim, (2) presenting the claim holder(s), (3) description of how the claim has been put forward in the public democratic debate, (4) short conclusion upfront, (5) In-depth explanation including at least two experts and presentation/reference to documentation where and when necessary, (6) The director of the Danish Health Authority is offered to reply, but where, however, it is his press office that answers succinctly.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 19/03/2023
There is no explicit mention of balancing fact-checking of different political parties in TjekDet's methodological procedure, but as stated in the application, the value statement clearly addresses this question. The provided fact-checks, and others I have read, show no evidence of bias in one political direction or the other. The statistics on political parties and politicians fact-checked show a fair distribution, with slightly more fact-checks of the two biggest political parties.
The only thing that stands out, is the relatively large amounts of fact-checks of the populist, right-wing, and anti-immigration party "Dansk Folkeparti". The most fact-checked politician, Alex Vanopslagh, is also from this party. This might suggest a bias towards this party, but it might also reflect a higher number of suspicions claims coming from this party. The application does not address this, which I think it could have.
The only thing that stands out, is the relatively large amounts of fact-checks of the populist, right-wing, and anti-immigration party "Dansk Folkeparti". The most fact-checked politician, Alex Vanopslagh, is also from this party. This might suggest a bias towards this party, but it might also reflect a higher number of suspicions claims coming from this party. The application does not address this, which I think it could have.
Assessor
Compliant
Date: 22/06/2023
It should be noted initially that Alex Vanopslagh is the party leader of the Liberal Alliance party. Thus, he is not politically affiliated with the Danish People's Party, as mentioned by the assessor here. Furthermore, it should be noted that it is not uncommon for certain parties to be subjected to fact-checking more than others, especially those on the political extremes. I would also like to add that if the number of fact-checks is distributed across political spectrums, the distribution is fairly even.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 09/07/2023
I agree. And sorry about atributing Vanopslagh to the wrong party.
Morten Skovsgaard (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 31/05/2023
The reviewed fact checks and the ones listed by tjekdet.dk indicate that the organization is fact checking claims from sources with differing political views and perspectives and do so thoroughly weighing up evidence on all sides.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
This is primarily regulated in the organisation's set of rules on "employee independence": https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet
It is also noted that the public can find short biographies of the organisation's employees, where these convey their business careers. https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#redaktionen
It is also noted that the public can find short biographies of the organisation's employees, where these convey their business careers. https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#redaktionen
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
Is described in presentation of our fact-checking methodology - see section on selection of experts: https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#saadanfaktatjekkervi
This generally does not happen since the journalists seeks to sort out sources or documentation that may constitute a conflict of interest. However, this cannot always be avoided, of which the following is an example of. In the fact-check "Why is it so difficult to determine whether Danish agriculture is the most climate-friendly in the world?" (https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/hvorfor-er-det-saa-svaert-afgoere-om-dansk-landbrug-er-verdens-mest-klimavenlige) several scientific studies and other investigations are presented. One of them is presented with the important remark that a lobbyist organization financed the study (section 13): "In 2020, the non-profit organization World Resources Institute (WRI) published a working paper with support from the Danish agricultural organization Landbrug & Fødevarer. Here, selected European countries as well as the USA, Brazil and New Zealand are compared. Denmark is placed in the group of countries with low emissions when it comes to milk production." The text in bold is to inform the reader that this documentation is generated by an organization that operates politically within the subject to which the fact-check relates.
This generally does not happen since the journalists seeks to sort out sources or documentation that may constitute a conflict of interest. However, this cannot always be avoided, of which the following is an example of. In the fact-check "Why is it so difficult to determine whether Danish agriculture is the most climate-friendly in the world?" (https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/hvorfor-er-det-saa-svaert-afgoere-om-dansk-landbrug-er-verdens-mest-klimavenlige) several scientific studies and other investigations are presented. One of them is presented with the important remark that a lobbyist organization financed the study (section 13): "In 2020, the non-profit organization World Resources Institute (WRI) published a working paper with support from the Danish agricultural organization Landbrug & Fødevarer. Here, selected European countries as well as the USA, Brazil and New Zealand are compared. Denmark is placed in the group of countries with low emissions when it comes to milk production." The text in bold is to inform the reader that this documentation is generated by an organization that operates politically within the subject to which the fact-check relates.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 19/03/2023
The methodological procedure describes that expert sources' potential conflict of interests should be assessed and mentioned, but the procedure does not address how TjekDet should deal with potential conflict of interests related to parties which TjekDet is affiliated with financially or otherwise. The general values of transparency and independence does, however, address this. I have searched for fact-checks in which any of the financial or organisational supporters of TjekDet are involved but haven’t found anything that would create any concerns related to potential conflicts of interests. However, TjekDet should perhaps in their methodological procedure explicitly address how such potential conflicts of interest related to organisational or finical affiliations would be dealt with.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
This is stated in the organisation's set of rules on "employees independence": https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 19/03/2023
This policy seems adequate.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
This is primarily regulated in the organisation's set of rules on "employee independence": https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 19/03/2023
I find the policy related to this satisfactory
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
Regarding template Article 3.1.I section 1 and 2: This is primarily regulated in the organisation's set of rules on "employee independence": https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet. Also this is mentioned in the internal handbook for employees as an appendix to employment contract.
It should be noted that the organization cannot verbatim convey the text in the code of standards template 3.1.I. section 1 and 2, as the text is worded in such a way that it can be proven to be in breach of current legislation on "taking on duties outside the service", cf. Section 15 of Law on salaried employees (funktionærloven). However, the current wording in the organisation's code of ethics regarding employee independence is considered to meet the code's requirements - specifically due to this sentence: "Employees may not, without consent, take on paid part-time employment or other duties outside the service, when these cannot be handled without disadvantage for the organization." The law does not contain a clear definition on what is "without disadvantage for the company", which can be interpreted even broader than the code of standards 3.1.I. requires.
Regarding template Article 3.1.I section 3: This is stated in https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet (value base on independence).
Regarding template Article 3.1.I section 4: This is primarily regulated in the organisation's set of rules on "employee independence": https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet. Also this is mentioned in the internal handbook for employees as an appendix to employment contract.
It should be noted that the organization cannot verbatim convey the text in the code of standards template 3.1.I. section 1 and 2, as the text is worded in such a way that it can be proven to be in breach of current legislation on "taking on duties outside the service", cf. Section 15 of Law on salaried employees (funktionærloven). However, the current wording in the organisation's code of ethics regarding employee independence is considered to meet the code's requirements - specifically due to this sentence: "Employees may not, without consent, take on paid part-time employment or other duties outside the service, when these cannot be handled without disadvantage for the organization." The law does not contain a clear definition on what is "without disadvantage for the company", which can be interpreted even broader than the code of standards 3.1.I. requires.
Regarding template Article 3.1.I section 3: This is stated in https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet (value base on independence).
Regarding template Article 3.1.I section 4: This is primarily regulated in the organisation's set of rules on "employee independence": https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet. Also this is mentioned in the internal handbook for employees as an appendix to employment contract.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 19/03/2023
I think the policy under "Emnployee independance" covers this in a satisfactory manner.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
In the our code of ethics it is stated: "We do not take a political position and we do not undertake activities or act in a way that may cast doubt on our independence and impartiality". This means that the organization cannot engage in activities on issues or topics that in any way advocate for political stance. https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 19/03/2023
TjekDet is not involved in any form of advocacy (apart from advocating for truth and fact-checking...)
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
TjekDet has signed the Danish press ethical rules. As mentioned in our ethical guidelines this sets our the main general rule that we must take into account "the individual citizen's demand for respect for personal integrity and privacy and the need for protection against unauthorized infringement". https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet
This means that TjekDet must generally anonymize - including blurring images or omitting video clips - that can identify persons who do not have a significant and relevant role in a fact-check, or/and who must be presumed to be subject to harassment or threats.
The latest example is the fact-check: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/vaccinekritiker-overfuser-sundhedspersonale-landet-over-med-forkert-paastand-om-83000
The story contains images where the persons appearing are not the sources of the claim, but are involuntarily subjected to harassment by the source behind the claim. Although the photos were taken in public space and therefore in principle do not have to be anonymised according to current Danish legislation, the editors have assessed that these may be exposed to further harassment, why the identity has been anonymized in accordance with the above mentioned Danish press etchical rules.
In continuation of the above, reference is made to the answer under article 3.2.E, which also contains guidelines for anonymization.
This means that TjekDet must generally anonymize - including blurring images or omitting video clips - that can identify persons who do not have a significant and relevant role in a fact-check, or/and who must be presumed to be subject to harassment or threats.
The latest example is the fact-check: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/vaccinekritiker-overfuser-sundhedspersonale-landet-over-med-forkert-paastand-om-83000
The story contains images where the persons appearing are not the sources of the claim, but are involuntarily subjected to harassment by the source behind the claim. Although the photos were taken in public space and therefore in principle do not have to be anonymised according to current Danish legislation, the editors have assessed that these may be exposed to further harassment, why the identity has been anonymized in accordance with the above mentioned Danish press etchical rules.
In continuation of the above, reference is made to the answer under article 3.2.E, which also contains guidelines for anonymization.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
The ethical guidelines deal with this question (as stated in the application) and the provided example shows how it is dealt with in practice. I have also seen other examples of similar practices of anonymization (for instance in this fact-check: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/stoetter-du-putin-venlig-oligark-ved-koebe-sommerferie-hos-tui). However, they have in common that explanations for the anonymizations are not provided in the fact-checks. Article 3.2.a does not explicitly say that explanations should be provided, but I think it would be good practice to do it (given the general emphasis on transparency)
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
TjekDet has signed the Danish press ethics rule. Therefore, our code of ethics states: TjekDet "takes into account the individual citizen's demand for respect for personal integrity and privacy and the need for protection against unauthorized infringement". https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet
In consequence of this, special consideration must be given to persons who cannot be expected to be aware of the effects of their statements or other participation. This includes - but is not limited to - the risk of harassment and intimidation. In these cases, the source of the claim must be anonymized.
In continuation of the above, reference is made to the answer under article 3.2.E, which also contains guidelines for anonymization.
In consequence of this, special consideration must be given to persons who cannot be expected to be aware of the effects of their statements or other participation. This includes - but is not limited to - the risk of harassment and intimidation. In these cases, the source of the claim must be anonymized.
In continuation of the above, reference is made to the answer under article 3.2.E, which also contains guidelines for anonymization.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
TjekDet complies with this, as they normally anonymize social media users who have spread claims fact-checked as false. There are, however, some inconstancy to this practice, as sometimes user names are not anonymized (like in this fact-check: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/viralt-opslag-goer-elbiler-vaerre-end-dieselbiler-med-usikre-tal-om-batteriers), sometimes they are available through archived versions of social media posts on wayback machine (like for instance in this fact-check: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/et-misforstaaet-punktum-udloeser-alarmerende-hoej-tesla-straaling), while other times social media users are fully anonymized (like in this fact-check: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/stoetter-du-putin-venlig-oligark-ved-koebe-sommerferie-hos-tui). It does, however, seem that degrees of anonymization follow the degrees of potential harm the social media users could be exposed to. Still, I think it could be good to have a more detailed guideline stating when and to what degree social media users (and other ordinary citizens) should be anonymized, and also to include explanations for such anonymizations in the fact-checks.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
TjekDet has signed the Danish press ethical rules. Therefore, our code of ethics states: TjekDet "takes into account the individual citizen's demand for respect for personal integrity and privacy and the need for protection against unauthorized infringement".
This rule, various general data protection regulations and internal guideliness sets out that TjekDet is required never to publish privacy information such as, for example, any kind of personal ID information, telephone numbers, email addresses, license plates, etc. It is also common Danish journalistic practice to anonymize/obfuscate such information if it appears in images or videos - and never mention such information in an article in any other way - regardless of whether the sources can be subject to harassment or not.
This rule, various general data protection regulations and internal guideliness sets out that TjekDet is required never to publish privacy information such as, for example, any kind of personal ID information, telephone numbers, email addresses, license plates, etc. It is also common Danish journalistic practice to anonymize/obfuscate such information if it appears in images or videos - and never mention such information in an article in any other way - regardless of whether the sources can be subject to harassment or not.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
I have not come across anything that would be in violation of this standard.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
TjekDet has signed the Danish press ethical rules. Therefore, our code of ethics states: TjekDet "takes into account the individual citizen's demand for respect for personal integrity and privacy and the need for protection against unauthorized infringement".
This rule, various general data protection regulations and internal guideliness sets out that TjekDet is required never to publish privacy information such as, for example, any kind of personal ID information, telephone numbers, email addresses, license plates, etc. It is also common Danish journalistic practice to anonymize/obfuscate such information if it appears in images or videos - and never mention such information in an article in any other way - regardless of whether the sources can be subject to harassment or not.
This rule, various general data protection regulations and internal guideliness sets out that TjekDet is required never to publish privacy information such as, for example, any kind of personal ID information, telephone numbers, email addresses, license plates, etc. It is also common Danish journalistic practice to anonymize/obfuscate such information if it appears in images or videos - and never mention such information in an article in any other way - regardless of whether the sources can be subject to harassment or not.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
I have not come across anything that would be in violation of this standard.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
TjekDet has signed the Danish press ethics rules. This means that sources of the claim or sources who in other ways are subject to criticism or allegations must always be presented with the criticism and offered to reply. This is briefly mentioned in the section on methodology https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#saadanfaktatjekkervi and also elaborated in TjekDets ethical code: https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet
In addition to the above the following applies according to the Danish press ethical rules and internal guidelines:
Contact must be made through as many channels as possible to ensure that the offer to reply reaches the source. The source must have reasonable time to react, which is at least 24 hours. If, despite the above mentioned efforts, it is not possible to establish contact with the source, this must, as a general rule, be anonymised in the article - regardless of whether there is a danger to the sources's life or may be subjected to harassment or not.
Special consideration must be given to sources who cannot be expected to be aware of the effects of their statements or other participation. This includes but is not limited to the risk of harassment and/or intimidation. In such cases, the source should be anonymized in the article .
Special consideration must be given to children. The editors must obtain permission from parents before publishing an interview or similar with children. Regardless of this, the main rule is that children's identities should be anonymised.
If the source is a politician, public authority or other person who maintains a prominent position, the time limit for responding to the offer to reply may be shorter, just as anonymization generally is not necessary if these mentioned types of sources do not respond to the offer.
In addition to the above the following applies according to the Danish press ethical rules and internal guidelines:
Contact must be made through as many channels as possible to ensure that the offer to reply reaches the source. The source must have reasonable time to react, which is at least 24 hours. If, despite the above mentioned efforts, it is not possible to establish contact with the source, this must, as a general rule, be anonymised in the article - regardless of whether there is a danger to the sources's life or may be subjected to harassment or not.
Special consideration must be given to sources who cannot be expected to be aware of the effects of their statements or other participation. This includes but is not limited to the risk of harassment and/or intimidation. In such cases, the source should be anonymized in the article .
Special consideration must be given to children. The editors must obtain permission from parents before publishing an interview or similar with children. Regardless of this, the main rule is that children's identities should be anonymised.
If the source is a politician, public authority or other person who maintains a prominent position, the time limit for responding to the offer to reply may be shorter, just as anonymization generally is not necessary if these mentioned types of sources do not respond to the offer.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
This is a stated guideline and consistent practice in the fact-checks I have read.
Morten Skovsgaard (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 31/05/2023
The fact that tjekdet.dk has signed the Danish Press Ethical Rules speaks to their adherence to this point. The Press Council will take up cases upon complaint and punish media organizations that have signed, but in specific cases do not meet the guidelines. Tjekdet has not been criticized in any case by the Press Council.
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
A formal (written) guideline does not exist, but there is an open culture about actions in such cases, and employees are informed that the organization has an insurance which covers psychological crisis assistance, should situations arise as mentioned in article 3.2.F.
Applicant
Date: 16/01/2023
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 23/03/2023
Not enough information provided to make a proper assessment of this.
Assessor
Needs more info
Date: 22/06/2023
Currently, we do not follow this best practice.
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
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
The policy complies with the standard
Morten Skovsgaard (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 31/05/2023
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
None exists.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 23/03/2023
There is not much related to this in TjekDet's correction policy, apart from a statement that corrections will be made on "all platforms", including social medias. I haven't seen any examples, but TjekDet has a Twitter account, and it would be good to know how corrections are dealt with on this platform and any other platforms which are not editable.
Assessor
Needs more info
Date: 22/06/2023
We have not had such cases, why I cannot present an example. However, the intention is that if such a situation were to arise, a correction will be placed in the comment section of the tweet, as Twitter does not allow us to edit existing posts. We see this procedure better than deleting the post, as Twitter users who have previously interacted with the post may be notified in some cases. Additionally, the post will be highlighted on our Twitter profile.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 09/07/2023
This sounds like an okay way of dealing with corrections on Twitter.
Morten Skovsgaard (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 31/05/2023
Tjekdet.dk updates the original article to correct the mistake and notes that a correction has been made as found in one of the sampled fact checks and as stated under the link above. Also, thekdet.dk lists on their website the corrections made within the last 12 months.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
During the past year TjekDet has not published a fact-check which fullfills the conditions in this article 3.3.C. However, mostly due to new scientific research published in 2022 was the reason why the editors chose to update and nuance further a fact-check published three years ago.
The correction quit significantly moderates the conclusion of the article, which is why individual paragraphs and sentences were rewritten, a misleading graphic element was removed, and a correction box was added at the top of the article, the correction was added to our overview of corrected articles. Unfortunately, the employee forgot to add the information about the creation on the social media post. It is now added.
The moderated fact-check: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/vermund-mod-skipper-hvor-klimaeffektivt-er-det-danske-landbrug
The correction overview page: https://www.tjekdet.dk/fejl-og-fakta
Example of a social media post where the correction has been announced (Due to technical circumstances determined by Facebook, correction could not be added in the share text of the post, but appears in an added comment): https://www.facebook.com/tjekdetdk/posts/pfbid02vd4KkVWxxLiRqXBzKXW7tuN4G5Kry9AnXRabCqC3mGiNkMPwQzVQf8hN1mxbjT1Ml?__cft__[0]=AZUKb3Vv7igoHFEv5B26b17IzUp-r2hdFT6KSDUVEJ4fou8DqFdTNWT5R71sdcok1XjDTCBLIs8bboGngz3vRPz8JJKu635NzjIsCQF8CqZlY4-r4cUIVG20c4N4d_9y6BmLZhJ4ZH67Kf03oZXP2lRSmXAEpDuCW3PqdewzRikiD0JzPSSpk2cCo6hEHEvbWSg&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R
The correction quit significantly moderates the conclusion of the article, which is why individual paragraphs and sentences were rewritten, a misleading graphic element was removed, and a correction box was added at the top of the article, the correction was added to our overview of corrected articles. Unfortunately, the employee forgot to add the information about the creation on the social media post. It is now added.
The moderated fact-check: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/vermund-mod-skipper-hvor-klimaeffektivt-er-det-danske-landbrug
The correction overview page: https://www.tjekdet.dk/fejl-og-fakta
Example of a social media post where the correction has been announced (Due to technical circumstances determined by Facebook, correction could not be added in the share text of the post, but appears in an added comment): https://www.facebook.com/tjekdetdk/posts/pfbid02vd4KkVWxxLiRqXBzKXW7tuN4G5Kry9AnXRabCqC3mGiNkMPwQzVQf8hN1mxbjT1Ml?__cft__[0]=AZUKb3Vv7igoHFEv5B26b17IzUp-r2hdFT6KSDUVEJ4fou8DqFdTNWT5R71sdcok1XjDTCBLIs8bboGngz3vRPz8JJKu635NzjIsCQF8CqZlY4-r4cUIVG20c4N4d_9y6BmLZhJ4ZH67Kf03oZXP2lRSmXAEpDuCW3PqdewzRikiD0JzPSSpk2cCo6hEHEvbWSg&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Needs more info
Date: 23/03/2023
TjekDet's guideline related to this standard does not state that corrections of substantial errors should include explanations of how the errors transpired. The provided example does not include such explanations, but the error that was corrected in the example is not very substantial, as it did not significantly alter the conclusion. I therefore won't claim that TjekDet does not comply with this standard, but additional information is required - perhaps some more detail related to this in the corrections policy.
Assessor
Needs more info
Date: 22/06/2023
A sentence has been added to our page about the correction policy: https://www.tjekdet.dk/fejl-og-fakta
It now states: "We add a note to the articles about what and where corrections or additions have been made in the respective articles, along with an explanation of the circumstances surrounding the error."
It now states: "We add a note to the articles about what and where corrections or additions have been made in the respective articles, along with an explanation of the circumstances surrounding the error."
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 08/07/2023
Sounds good!
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
The following two guidelines are followed:
1. Where a correction/addition is made which is not of significan nature a correction box is added in the bottom of the fact-check: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/dansk-landbrug-udraabes-som-loesningen-paa-klimakrisen-med-misvisende-regnestykke
2. Where a correction/addition is made which of is of significant nature a correction box is added in the top of the fact-check: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/vermund-mod-skipper-hvor-klimaeffektivt-er-det-danske-landbrug
1. Where a correction/addition is made which is not of significan nature a correction box is added in the bottom of the fact-check: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/dansk-landbrug-udraabes-som-loesningen-paa-klimakrisen-med-misvisende-regnestykke
2. Where a correction/addition is made which of is of significant nature a correction box is added in the top of the fact-check: https://www.tjekdet.dk/faktatjek/vermund-mod-skipper-hvor-klimaeffektivt-er-det-danske-landbrug
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
This practice is outlined in the guidelines and seems to be followed in the fact-checks.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
https://www.tjekdet.dk/fejl-og-fakta
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
The correction page includes corrections made dated back to March 2020
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
ThekDet's guidelines related to this standard state that anyone can contact the newsroom about corrections, and that the editorial staff will evaluate all such requests. However, the guidelines does not further detail how such requests are dealt with.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
An email address is provided in the online corrections 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
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
No such offer is formally defined, but in practice may come into question depending on the circumstances.
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: 10/01/2023
These conditions are adhired and described in the following sections combined:
1. The organisation's articles of association § 6.2: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#vedt%C3%A6gter
2. Description of the editorial organization: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#redaktionen
3. Description of the members of the board: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#bestyrelsen
4. Description of the organisation's ownership: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#ejerforhold
1. The organisation's articles of association § 6.2: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#vedt%C3%A6gter
2. Description of the editorial organization: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#redaktionen
3. Description of the members of the board: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#bestyrelsen
4. Description of the organisation's ownership: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#ejerforhold
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
The information is adequate
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#ejerforhold
Since the organization is a independent, non-profit association the information on ownership (more than 5 percent of shares) is not relevant.
Since the organization is a independent, non-profit association the information on ownership (more than 5 percent of shares) is not relevant.
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
The necessary information is disclosed on the web site
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#bestyrelsen
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
Board members are listed, as is the charter, which outlines how the board operates
Proof of registration/legal status:
Proof of ownership:
Proof of governance structure:
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
Documentation from the Danish Central Business Register is linked to and attached.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
1. Description of the editorial organization: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#redaktionen
2. Description of the members of the board: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#bestyrelsen
2. Description of the members of the board: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#bestyrelsen
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
Editrors and board members are presented on the web site.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#redaktionen
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 23/03/2023
All newsroom staff members are presented on the web site, with bios including previous work relations.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
Generally provided here: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os
Specifically here: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#mission and here: https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet
Specifically here: https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#mission and here: https://www.tjekdet.dk/arbejdsproces-og-etisk-regelsaet#regelsaet
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 24/03/2023
A mission statement and core values are presented online.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
https://www.tjekdet.dk/om-os#vedt%C3%A6gter
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 24/03/2023
The charter (bylaws) is available online.
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:
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 24/03/2023
I can’t see any conflicts of interests related to the income sources
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
The latest completed annual accounts are 2021. Accounts for 2022 are expected to be completed by the state-authorised auditor and published before the end of the first quarter.
All requested information in 4.2.A and 4.2.B is thorougly described and publicly available on our website, jvf. financial accounting 2021, but is also repeated here in English:
Total income in 2021: DKK z<
In the period 1 January 2021 to 31 December 2021, the association's financial basis was the following:
A grant of DKK 2,800,000 from the lotto distribution funds, which originate from the profit from Danish Lottery business and part of the profit from The Danish Class Lottery. The money has been granted by the Danish Parliament's finance committee "for the earmarked purpose of establishing and running a non-commercial and freely accessible national portal to combat misinformation, disinformation and fake news in the Danish media and information environment".
Facebook has appointed TjekDet as a third-party fact checker in Denmark. The designation assumes that a fact-checking media is internationally IFCN certified. The collaboration implies that the social platform covers the research costs per article that relate to this collaboration. In the year 2021, this income amounted to DKK 994,078.
In 2021, TjekDet, together with three partners, prepared the learning material "Stop. Think. Check it.", which is aimed at young people and contains videos, podcasts and teaching materials. The project was supported by the Ministry of Culture's Democracy Fund with a grant of DKK 600,060.
At the request of TjekDet, researchers from Roskilde University conducted a study that aimed to shed light on the scope and spread of conspiracy theories on the Danish part of social media. The research project was prepared with support of DKK 100,000 from the Illum Foundation.
In 2021, TjekDet also had a number of other various revenue-covered activities, which primarily consist of lecturing. In the year 2021, this income amounted to a total of DKK 28,382.
Check It's ad-free and a freely accessible universe.
The association's annual report for 2021 can be viewed here (click).
https://www.tjekdet.dk/oekonomi
All requested information in 4.2.A and 4.2.B is thorougly described and publicly available on our website, jvf. financial accounting 2021, but is also repeated here in English:
Total income in 2021: DKK z<
In the period 1 January 2021 to 31 December 2021, the association's financial basis was the following:
A grant of DKK 2,800,000 from the lotto distribution funds, which originate from the profit from Danish Lottery business and part of the profit from The Danish Class Lottery. The money has been granted by the Danish Parliament's finance committee "for the earmarked purpose of establishing and running a non-commercial and freely accessible national portal to combat misinformation, disinformation and fake news in the Danish media and information environment".
Facebook has appointed TjekDet as a third-party fact checker in Denmark. The designation assumes that a fact-checking media is internationally IFCN certified. The collaboration implies that the social platform covers the research costs per article that relate to this collaboration. In the year 2021, this income amounted to DKK 994,078.
In 2021, TjekDet, together with three partners, prepared the learning material "Stop. Think. Check it.", which is aimed at young people and contains videos, podcasts and teaching materials. The project was supported by the Ministry of Culture's Democracy Fund with a grant of DKK 600,060.
At the request of TjekDet, researchers from Roskilde University conducted a study that aimed to shed light on the scope and spread of conspiracy theories on the Danish part of social media. The research project was prepared with support of DKK 100,000 from the Illum Foundation.
In 2021, TjekDet also had a number of other various revenue-covered activities, which primarily consist of lecturing. In the year 2021, this income amounted to a total of DKK 28,382.
Check It's ad-free and a freely accessible universe.
The association's annual report for 2021 can be viewed here (click).
https://www.tjekdet.dk/oekonomi
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 24/03/2023
The information is provided to the public on TjekDet's website
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
Cf. both the general description and stated budgets and accounts here: https://www.tjekdet.dk/oekonomi
Steen Steensen (assessor)
Compliant
Date: 24/03/2023
This information is provided year by year n TjekDet's website
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
The organization has not received such unpaid significant commitments made to other organisation as defined in this article 4.2.D.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
No.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
The organization has not received such goods and services from external sources as defined in article 4.2.F.
Applicant
Date: 10/01/2023
The organization has not received such goods and services from external sources as defined in article 4.2.F.
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