{"title":"Comparison of the Transparency of Fact-checking: A Global Perspective","authors":"Qiong Ye","doi":"10.1080/17512786.2023.2211555","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In recent years, with the global proliferation of fake news, fact-checking has emerged globally, and transparency has become the consensus of global fact-checkers. Based on the three transparency commitments signed by fact-checkers and IFCN, this article compares the transparency of source, funds, and methodology of fact-checking news in six countries (the United States, the United Kingdom, India, South Africa, Brazil, and Australia) on six continents. The study found that South Africa and the United States are more transparent than other countries. Moreover, transparency is not only related to the social environment, but also related to the subject of verification and the news writing habits of each country. This article also compares the fact-checkers of the NGO model with the newsroom model and finds that the transparency of the fact-checkers of the NGO model is much higher than that of the newsroom model. Through these, this article broadens the perspective of global comparison of fact-checking, and explores the more complicated reasons behind the differences in the transparency of fact-checking across countries.","PeriodicalId":47909,"journal":{"name":"Journalism Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journalism Practice","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2023.2211555","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
ABSTRACT In recent years, with the global proliferation of fake news, fact-checking has emerged globally, and transparency has become the consensus of global fact-checkers. Based on the three transparency commitments signed by fact-checkers and IFCN, this article compares the transparency of source, funds, and methodology of fact-checking news in six countries (the United States, the United Kingdom, India, South Africa, Brazil, and Australia) on six continents. The study found that South Africa and the United States are more transparent than other countries. Moreover, transparency is not only related to the social environment, but also related to the subject of verification and the news writing habits of each country. This article also compares the fact-checkers of the NGO model with the newsroom model and finds that the transparency of the fact-checkers of the NGO model is much higher than that of the newsroom model. Through these, this article broadens the perspective of global comparison of fact-checking, and explores the more complicated reasons behind the differences in the transparency of fact-checking across countries.
期刊介绍:
ournalism Practice provides opportunities for reflective, critical and research-based studies focused on the professional practice of journalism. The emphasis on journalism practice does not imply any false or intellectually disabling disconnect between theory and practice, but simply an assertion that Journalism Practice’s primary concern is to analyse and explore issues of practice and professional relevance. Journalism Practice is an intellectually rigorous journal with all contributions being refereed anonymously by acknowledged international experts in the field. An intellectually lively, but professionally experienced, Editorial Board with a wide-ranging experience of journalism practice advises and supports the Editor. Journalism Practice is devoted to: the study and analysis of significant issues arising from journalism as a field of professional practice; relevant developments in journalism training and education, as well as the construction of a reflective curriculum for journalism; analysis of journalism practice across the distinctive but converging media platforms of magazines, newspapers, online, radio and television; and the provision of a public space for practice-led, scholarly contributions from journalists as well as academics. Journalism Practice’s ambitious scope includes: the history of journalism practice; the professional practice of journalism; journalism training and education; journalism practice and new technology; journalism practice and ethics; and journalism practice and policy.