Collaborative journalism versus disinformation An approach to fact-checking projects in Mexico, Argentina, Colombia, Brazil, and Spain

Abstract

ABSTRACT

This paper surveys collaborative fact-checking outlets set in four Latin American countries and in Spain. By providing a deep theoretical analysis, we aim to examine the phenomenon, framing the debate, and focusing on the study of collaborative projects in Mexico, Columbia, Argentina, Brazil, and Spain. The aim is to address the growth of aforementioned initiatives and evaluate its capacity to tackle disinformation. To fulfill this purpose, we use a methodology that combines qualitative case studies and quantitative content analysis approaches. Subsequently, we evaluate the verification procedures carried out by platforms, dividing the analysis into (1) transparency and accountability, (2) communication of results. This allow us to provide an overview of the huge array of methods used to verify political claims and doubtful contents. At the same time, evaluate essential aspects such as: organization, funding, ethical commitment, staff transparency, format and type of content published, structure of the platform and interaction with readers, and media ties. Finally, we conclude by discussing the outcome of fact-checking platforms, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses that must be addressed in order to consolidate these platforms as a worthwhile option in fighting disinformation. The findings of the study suggest that there is room for improvement, thus we make the following recommendations: (1) increase transparency by detailing the process involved in each of the stages of the verification, (2) provide information about sources and methodologies in enough detail that readers could replicate the fact check, (3) clarify the source of the funding and specify the nature of the collaborations, (4) standardize and simplify the truth scales in a maximum of four categories: “True,” “False,” “Out of context,” “Cannot be proven.” Finally, it would be desirable that each initiative would draft their own code of principles stressing the importance of the ethical commitments entered into by the platform.