This post was originally published in 2019 and updated in 2024.
by Terrell Heick
1. In the article, headline or social media share, “who” says “what”? That is, what specific author and publication make what type of claim about what topic or ideas?
2. Is what is stated or asserted a fact or opinion?
3. Does this headline seem true? (This is especially critical for “fact-based” headlines.) If so, by whose standards? Who would disagree with that and why? How can the facts be verified? Does the author use ‘gray areas’ of ‘truth’ in a way that seems designed to cause a stir, raise doubt, influence thinking, or otherwise change readers’ minds?
4. Is this headline completely “true”/accurate or is it based on partially true information/data? Misleading information is often based on partial truths and then rephrased to fit a particular purpose: to provoke an emotion such as anger or fear that leads to an outcome of some kind: a like, a donation, a purchase, a registration, a vote, etc.
5. Are there logical fallacies embedded in the headline itself, especially straw-man arguments, emotional appeals, or charged language intended to polarize, unite, or “attract” readers?
6. Is the topic on which the headline is based important? Is it worth understanding more deeply?
7. Who does this seem to benefit if it is accepted as “true”?
8. Is this information, angle or “view” new or something that has been said before (and either verified or debunked)?
9. Is the data (fact-based) or position (opinion-based) inherent in the headline shared by other credible editors or does it contrast with the ‘status quo’? If the latter, how does this affect the headline?
10. What background information would you need to be able to evaluate your credibility? Where can I get more information about the headline’s topics to better evaluate its credibility? What can I gain or lose if I accept this as true?
11. Does the ‘news’ accurately represent the ‘big picture’ or is it something ‘selected’ (in or out of context) designed to cause an emotional response in the reader?
For the second set of questions to think critically about news headlines, we turned to the News Literacy Project, a media standards project that created a set of questions to help students think critically about news headlines.
12. Measure your emotional reaction. Is it strong? Are you angry? Do you have intense hopes that the information will turn out to be true or false?
13. Reflect on how you found this. Was it promoted on a website? Did it appear on any social network? Did someone you know send it to you?
14. Consider the headline or message:
to. Do you use excessive punctuation or ALL CAPS for emphasis?
b. Do you claim it contains a secret or tells you something ‘the media’ doesn’t want you to know?
do. Don’t stop at the headline. Keep exploring!
15. Is this information designed to be easily shared, like a meme?
16. Consider the source of information:
to. Is it a known source?
b. Is there a byline (author’s name) attached to this article? Does that author have any specific knowledge or experience?
do. Go to the ‘About’ section of the website. Does the site describe itself as a “fantasy news” or “satirical news” site? What else do you notice or not notice?
17. Does the example you are evaluating have a date?
18. Does the example cite a variety of sources, including official and expert sources? Does the information in this example appear in (other) media reports?
19. Does the example have hyperlinks to other quality sources?
20. Can you confirm, through a reverse image search, that any of the images in your example are authentic (that is, they have not been altered or taken from another context)?
21. If you looked up this example on a fact-checking site like snopes.com, factcheck.org, or politifact.com, is there a fact check that labels it as less than true?
Remember:
- It is easy to clone an existing website and create fake tweets to fool people.
- AI and deep fakes are increasingly common
- Bots are active on social media and are designed to dominate conversations and spread propaganda.
- Propaganda and/or disinformation often use a real image of an unrelated event.
- Debunk examples of misinformation every time you see them. It’s good for democracy!
You can download the full ‘checkology’ pdf here and find more resources at checkology.org
