Source and claim verification checklist

What to take away

• Check each material claim rather than assigning one trust score to a whole article.
• Preserve original evidence, versions, calculations, and contact attempts.
• Test whether apparent confirmations come from independent origins.
• Match publication language to the strength and scope of the evidence.
• Review headlines, captions, alerts, and social text as carefully as the article.

Use this checklist before publication or when reviewing a disputed story. Add the name of the person who checked each item, the date, and a note showing where the evidence is stored. A checked box without a record is hard to audit.

Assignment and claim scope

• Central question, audience, deadline, jurisdiction, and risk recorded
• Material factual claims copied into a ledger
• Compound claims divided into testable parts
• Fact, interpretation, opinion, allegation, estimate, and prediction labeled
• Publication threshold set higher for claims that can cause serious harm
• Unknowns and out-of-scope questions identified

Source identity and access

• Full name, role, organization, contact route, and relevant access confirmed
• Firsthand knowledge separated from information learned elsewhere
• Anonymous source identity known to an accountable editor
• Reason for anonymity documented and narrower attribution considered
• Conflicts, incentives, funding, advocacy, and litigation checked
• Identity details independently verified where practical

The Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics advises journalists to verify information before release, use original sources when possible, provide context, identify sources clearly, and update and correct information throughout a story's life. The code is voluntary ethical guidance, not a law or a certificate that proves any individual claim.

Documents, data, and media

• Earliest available document or media file located
• Issuer, creator, date, version, and chain of custody recorded
• Full item reviewed rather than a crop, excerpt, or screenshot alone
• Definitions, units, population, period, exclusions, and revisions checked
• Calculations reproduced from raw values
• Metadata treated as a clue and tested against content and context
• Redactions, missing attachments, edits, and conversion limits noted

Evidence fit

• Each source supports the exact sentence beside it
• Source authority matches the narrow subject and claim type
• Filing a statement is not confused with proving the statement
• Personal experience is not generalized beyond its scope
• Correlation is not rewritten as causation
• Absence of evidence is not called evidence of absence without a sound basis
• Contradictions are recorded and investigated

Independence and corroboration

• Reposts, syndication, press releases, and circular citations traced
• Independent origins counted instead of page count
• Two sources do not merely repeat the same evidence
• Responsible subject received a fair chance to address a material allegation
• Response deadline, questions, reply, and declined or unanswered requests saved
• Relevant evidence that weakens the preferred conclusion included

Method and transparency

The International Fact-Checking Network's Code of Principles sets expectations for nonpartisanship, source transparency, organizational and funding disclosure, methodology, and corrections among its signatories. It is an organizational standard. It does not make every published rating correct, so readers should still inspect the cited evidence and reasoning.

• Search terms, databases, calls, visits, and access dates logged
• Selection rule for claims and sources can be explained
• Evidence links lead to specific pages or files
• Paywalled, deleted, private, or inaccessible evidence described accurately
• Translation and transcription methods checked
• Automation or AI use reviewed by a responsible person
• Method limits stated near the conclusion they constrain

Publication language

• Headline does not overstate the body
• "Confirmed," "reported," "alleged," and "estimated" used precisely
• Motive and intent attributed or supported by direct evidence
• Numbers retain units, denominators, periods, and uncertainty
• Quotations preserve meaning and surrounding conditions
• Images, captions, credits, dates, and depicted locations checked
• Commentary, satire, simulation, reconstruction, and illustration labeled

Final review and correction readiness

• A second person can reproduce the central finding
• Highest-risk claims receive independent editorial review
• Article, headline, deck, chart, newsletter, alert, and social copy agree
• Evidence set and final version preserved
• Correction contact route is visible
• Plan names every surface that must change if an error is found

Common questions

Must every box be checked?

No. Mark an item not applicable and explain why. Do not silently skip a material check.

Is two-source confirmation always required?

No fixed number replaces judgment. One conclusive record may establish a narrow fact, while several dependent accounts may establish little.

Should a source approve the article?

No. A source can confirm quotations or technical details without controlling framing, evidence, or conclusions.

What belongs in the verification file?

Keep the claim ledger, sources, versions, notes, recordings, calculations, contact attempts, decisions, and final publication copy according to lawful retention and security rules.