Reporters and editors rely on original documents, recordings and multiple interviews
By Kelly Burch-Granite State News Collaborative
There’s an old saying in journalism: “If your mother says she loves you, check it out.”
The adage underscores a fundamental aspect of responsible news reporting: the need to verify and fact-check all information, and bring a healthy dose of skepticism to even things that seem as obvious as a mother’s love.
I’ve never personally asked my mom to prove her love, but in my 18 years as a reporter, I have asked sources for documented proof that would make most people squirm, ranging from their tax returns and medical records to personal text messages and letters.
Asking for and verifying information has always been essential for journalists and those they work with, and although the process is evolving in the digital age, it remains a cornerstone of newsrooms.
Ellen Ruppel Shell, professor emerita at Boston University’s journalism program and longtime contributing editor at The Atlantic, said journalists must always rely on evidence-based analysis, not assertions.
“Good journalism really is not that different from good science,” she said. “You interrogate your assumptions.”
The fundamentals of fact-checking
The easiest news items to verify are facts and figures that are in the public record. Thanks to digital files, it’s easier than ever to check concrete facts, such as laws, ordinances and public spending.
“The ability to fact-check now is so much better than it was 40 years ago,” said Tom Kearney, an editor with the Granite State News Collaborative, who’s worked at newspapers and news outlets in New Hampshire and Vermont, among other places. “There’s no excuse for not getting the facts right, because they’re right at your fingertips.”
Responsible reporters are the first stop for ensuring accuracy. While they may start investigating a story based on a press release, other news reports or a tip, they go directly to original files to verify information whenever possible, making requests for public information if needed. And when editing a story before submitting it, they return to those documents to ensure they’ve got everything right.
Once a reporter files a story, the editor also reviews it for accuracy.
“I tend to fact-check everything, from spelling of names to facts and figures,” said Carol Robidoux, founder and publisher of Manchester Ink Link.
The time she dedicates to this depends on the story. If a reporter is well known to her and has been covering a beat (or topic) for a long time — such as Andrew Sylvia covering Manchester city government — “I’m usually very confident that he’s getting his facts right.”
For newer reporters or topics, Robidoux is especially thorough in her review and there’s “a lot more process involved in fact-checking,” she said.
Verifying complex narratives
Verification becomes more difficult when journalists are covering things that aren’t documented facts. Crime is a classic example.
“You don’t know [what happened] unless you’re an eyewitness,” Kearney said. “You have to talk to a bunch of people and determine what is the most likely version of the truth.”
In these situations, “proof” is too strong a demand, Ruppel Shell said. Instead, journalists rely on evidence from multiple sources, and can use phrasing such as “all evidence suggests” to make clear that they’re not reporting definitive facts, Ruppel Shell said.
If a story is controversial, “that’s when [journalists] have to be particularly careful,” to ensure they have substantial evidence, she added.
Fact-checking complex stories moves beyond straight verification of facts, figures and spellings. According to an editor's fact-checking checklist from the Knight Science Journalism Program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, editors need to ask nuanced questions, such as “does the story provide appropriate context and caveats?” and “does the story acknowledge real or perceived conflicts of interest?”
Reporting and interviewing
Journalists and editors work together to ensure reporting is as accurate as possible, especially for complex stories. They also rely on records, such as video footage or recordings of an interview.
In addition, they reach out to multiple people who are familiar with the situation to verify that they’re understanding it correctly.
"You need a stable of people, really, who you can turn to,” Kearney said. “You need a pretty wide range of people who are willing to confirm things or not, even if they’re not on the record.”
When relying on experts, such as researchers, professionals and public officials, journalists interview multiple sources, aiming to get to the truth of a matter or showcase opposing points of view within a story.
“Anything … that could reasonably be disputed should be attributed” to the source who revealed that information, according to guidelines set by The Associated Press. The attribution should briefly explain why this source is credible when it comes to the topic at hand.
Sources — the people who are interviewed — don’t typically get to see a story before it’s published. Occasionally, however — particularly if a story is personal or complicated — Robidoux will review “the section of the story [with] someone who did the interview to make sure we got it right before publication.”
AI is a tool, but must also be verified
Tom Haines is a former reporter for The Boston Globe, among other outlets, who now teaches journalism at the University of New Hampshire. For his students, the need to fact-check can be “new terrain,” he said, given how much unverified information they consume on social media.
“They’ve grown up in this world where everything is gathered and sort of published without doing a lot of independent multi-source verification,” Haines said.
While the digital world makes it easier to check facts, in many ways it can also create complications. Artificial intelligence can be a good tool for fact-checking, but the data reported by AI must also be verified.
“You have to have a human component,” he said.
He cautions his journalism students that just because something has been previously reported multiple times doesn’t mean it’s true — something Robidoux echoes.
“It’s easy for the robots to pick up on the mistake,” she said.
If an error is included in a story — by robots or humans — the news organization issues a prompt correction.
“If you made the mistake, you have to correct it …” Kearney said. “It’s up to you to do what’s necessary.”
This story is part of Know Your News — a Granite State News Collaborative and NENPA Press Freedom Committee initiative on why the First Amendment, press freedom, and local news matter. Don’t just read this. Share it with one person who doesn’t usually follow local news — that’s how we make an impact. More at collaborativenh.org.