European Fact-Checking Standards Network (EFCSN)

VERIFIED MEMBERS

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

← Return to organization page

Viral Check

Website

https://viral.sapo.pt/

Date

07/02/2025

Please, answer the following questions:

Applicant

Date: 10/09/2024

Founded in 2022, Viral Check is the first Portuguese health fact-checking newspaper. Its main activities are integrated in three major axes: producing fact-checking texts and journalistic articles on health; disseminating reliable information based on the best scientific evidence; providing readers with tools and content to improve the health literacy of the general population. Viral Check began to be conceived during the Covid-19 pandemic, an event that made visible the need to make the population more resilient to the growing disinformation about health in public discourse and on social media.

Final Ratings

First assessor rating :

Compliant

Second assessor rating :

Compliant

Conversation

Pedro Jerónimo (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 25/11/2024

It would be useful to indicate that these 10 people:

X are full time;
Y are part-time;
Z are collaborators.

Applicant

Compliant

Date: 03/01/2025

Of these 10 people, four are internal employees who work full-time at the company and the rest are external collaborators.

Applicant

Date: 10/09/2024

At the moment, either full, part time or as external collaborators, 10 people work for Viral Check: six journalists, a graphic designer, an illustrator, a social media manager and a producer.

Final Ratings

First assessor rating :

Compliant

Second assessor rating :

Compliant

Conversation

Pedro Jerónimo (assessor)

Compliant

Date: 25/11/2024

It would be useful to indicate that these 10 people:

X are full time;
Y are part-time;
Z are collaborators.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 03/01/2025

Of these 10 people, four are internal employees who work full-time at the company and the rest are external collaborators.

Article 2.2: Methodology

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

Final Ratings

First assessor rating :

Compliant

Second assessor rating :

Compliant

Conversation

Pedro Jerónimo (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 27/12/2024

It is not clear either in the Method (https://viral.sapo.pt/o-nosso-metodo/) or in the verified publications that this requirement is met. If by chance each publication is reviewed by at least one person other than the author, this is not mentioned. In addition to mentioning it in the Method, it would also be a good practice for verification and transparency to indicate, in each publication, not only the author, but also the "reviewer" / second person who reviewed it.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 03/01/2025

As is the case in all newsrooms, all of our texts are reviewed and edited by the editor/editor-in-chief. When texts are written by the editor/editor-in-chief, they are reviewed by another member of the team.

Even so, considering this recommendation, we have decided to add this information to the page dedicated to explaining our methodology, as you can see at the following link:https://viral.sapo.pt/o-nosso-metodo/

Best Practices:

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

Article 3.1: Non-Partisanship and Impartiality

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

Article 3.2: Privacy and Safety

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

Best Practices

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

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: 10/09/2024

We have no relevant corrections to report.

Final Ratings

First assessor rating :

Compliant

Second assessor rating :

Needs more info

Conversation

Pedro Jerónimo (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 27/12/2024

Even if there are no "relevant corrections", it is a sign of good practice and transparency to have accessible and aggregated verifications that have been corrected.

Applicant

Needs more info

Date: 03/01/2025

In line with this recommendation, we have added an example of a text that underwent a minor correction (which did not affect its rating) in the section of the website containing our correction policy (available at this link: https://viral.sapo.pt/o-nosso-metodo/).

Pedro Jerónimo (assessor)

Needs more info

Date: 08/01/2025

My suggestion was that any user should be able to find, on a single page, the list of corrected errors. It is not something that would prevent us from continuing, I just think it would be a good transparency initiative.

Best Practices:

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

Article 4.1: Organisational transparency

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

Proof of registration/legal status:

Final Ratings

First assessor rating :

Compliant

Second assessor rating :

Compliant

Proof of ownership:

Final Ratings

First assessor rating :

Compliant

Second assessor rating :

Compliant

Proof of governance structure:

Final Ratings

First assessor rating :

Compliant

Second assessor rating :

Compliant

Article 4.2: Financial transparency and conflicts of interest

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

Applicant

Date: 10/09/2024

Final Ratings

First assessor rating :

Compliant

Second assessor rating :

Compliant

Final Ratings

First assessor rating :

Compliant

Second assessor rating :

Compliant

Conversation

Applicant

Non Compliant

Date: 03/01/2025

In this section, we have checked the “No” option, as we do not publish sponsored content, so we have no links to examples of sponsored texts to provide.

Best Practices

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5.b Please provide all the relevant information to demonstrate the existence of “a meaningful connection with the country or countries where the mis- and disinformation your organization fact-check originates from”.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2.L. Report on the operation’s impact on issues of public interest

3.1.A. Be editorially free and politically independent.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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