Brief Methodological Approach to Fact Checking Claims
MFC collects information from various sources for fact-checking but does not evaluate opinions, only factual claims. The editorial team decides on the verification process, and fact-checkers reach out to original sources and use various tools for verification.
Source Attribution
MFC attributes sources and references to support claims and conclusions. In cases where sources’ security is a concern, their identity may be kept anonymous.
Objectivity and Fairness
MFC’s work aspires to ensure reports are balanced and fact-based, avoiding biases.
Principle of ‘Do No Harm’
MFC’s ethical guidelines include avoiding ad hominem attacks, respecting copyright and privacy.
Transparency and Non-Partisanship
MFC discloses its funding sources and ensures there’s no conflict of interest in its activities. It’s also committed to ensuring transparency and non-partisanship in its activities.
Rating Claims
Claims are rated as “Fact,” “False,” “Misleading,” or “Unproven” based on their accuracy.
Corrections Policy
MFC commits to prompt and transparent error correction, allowing the audience to report errors/mistakes. Corrections, updates, or retractions will be distinctly labeled, explaining the changes made. A feedback system is put in place for continuous improvement and quality assurance. MFC encourages readers to report errors, provide feedback or send complaints to [email protected]
