Cleansing Bias in Fact-Checking: A Call for Objectivity

In this article, we explore how misinformation can be harmful and how fact-checkers can prioritize their work to address these issues. Interviews with experts revealed that emotional and sensational language are key tactics used by creators of misinformation to make it more shareable and influential. These tactics include appealing to emotions, using language that sensationalizes urgency or danger, and framing misinformation in a way that makes it more relatable or relevant.
To combat these strategies, the article suggests using structured approaches for fact-checking prioritization. This involves analyzing the potential harm of misinformation based on various factors, such as its direct impact, the level of threat to physical safety, and its affinity for the local context. By understanding these factors, fact-checkers can better prioritize their work and address the most harmful misinformation more quickly.
One participant noted that simply displaying a score or level of harm is not enough; they also want to see an analysis of why something is harmful. This would help with prioritization and understanding the potential impact of misinformation. Another participant emphasized the importance of removing bias from fact-checking and editing, ensuring that any decision-making is guided by a journalistic approach rather than subjective opinions.
In summary, this article highlights the strategies used by creators of misinformation to make it more shareable and influential, and provides structured approaches for fact-checkers to prioritize their work and address these issues more effectively. By understanding the potential harm of misinformation and analyzing its various factors, fact-checkers can better combat false information and protect society from its negative effects.