Methodology

DFRAC maintains strict separation from political, financial, and partisan influence in both our editorial decisions and fact-checking processes

1. How We Select Claims for Fact-Checking

DFRAC monitors a wide range of public-facing information sources to identify claims that require verification. These include:

A) Social media platforms (e.g., X/Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp)

B) Public speeches, interviews, and statements by political leaders, public officials, and other influential figures

C) News channels, digital media outlets, and viral multimedia content

D) Claims submitted by readers

A claim is prioritized for fact-checking when one or more of the following conditions are met:

A) High Reach or Virality – The claim has spread widely or is rapidly gaining traction.

B) Risk of Harm – The claim could incite hostility, reinforce discrimination, or cause reputational, communal, political, or physical harm. 

C) Public Significance – The claim relates to matters of public safety, governance, civic life, economics, health, or elections.

D) Source Credibility – The claim originates from a verified account, a public office holder, a major media organization, or other influential voice whose statements impact public understanding.

2. Our Approach to Evidence and Sources

DFRAC is committed to evidence-based, transparent sourcing, in line with the IFCN Code of Principles. All sources used in a fact-check are clearly cited and, where possible, made available to readers through links or document excerpts.

2.1 Primary Sources

Primary sources are the foundation of our verification. We classify evidence as primary when it comes directly from the entity or event being investigated. Examples include:

A) Official police documents: FIRs, charge sheets, notifications, station diary entries, or written responses obtained directly from authorized police departments or their official spokespersons.

B) Government documents: Gazette notifications, Ministry publications, Parliament records, RTI responses, court documents, and regulator-issued reports.

C) Institutional and economic data: Central bank reports, official statistical releases, public datasets, and any raw data or first-hand documentation released by relevant institutions.

D) Original multimedia evidence: Photographs, videos, audio recordings, and eyewitness testimonies directly linked to the event/claim.

E) Direct communication: On-the-record responses from officials, subject-matter experts, researchers, or organizations involved in the claim.

When foundational primary data is unobtainable, DFRAC uses the highest-level publicly available official release.

2.2 Secondary Sources

Secondary sources are used when primary evidence is unavailable, incomplete, or needs contextualization. These may include:

• Reputable media reports
• Academic analyses
• Research papers
• Expert commentary (only when necessary and clearly attributed)

3. Verification Techniques and Tools

Our fact-checking process typically includes:

• Reverse image and video search (Google, TinEye, Yandex, InVID, etc.)
• Geolocation and timestamp verification
• Social media archive tools (Wayback Machine, Ghost Archive, Archive.fo)
• Keyword searches and advanced search filters
• Accessing official portals, government databases, public record systems
• Contacting institutions, organizations, and individuals for clarification
• Consulting subject-matter experts for complex or technical claims

4. Responsible Use of AI Tools

Our AI-assisted workflow includes:

AI-Assisted Search or Pattern Recognition: AI tools help identify visual anomalies in images/videos.

Final Assessment by Human Fact-Checkers : The determination of a claim’s rating (True, False, Misleading, etc.) is made solely by our trained human fact-checkers based on verified primary and secondary evidence.

We do not classify AI-generated material as a primary source.

The human-verified analysis, supported by independently validated evidence, is the official basis of our conclusions.

5. Writing and Presenting the Fact-Check

Each fact-check aims to provide clear, accessible, and evidence-rich explanations. The structure typically includes:

• Summary of the claim
• Verdict and evidence-based justification
• Step-by-step explanation of the verification process
• Primary and secondary sources cited
• Links, documents, images, and supporting files

6. Updating and Corrections Policy

Information evolves, and so do our fact-checks.

• Developing stories may be updated as new evidence emerges.
• Updates are marked with timestamps and explanations of what changed.
• If DFRAC makes an error, we issue a prominent correction with full transparency about the nature of the mistake and the corrected information.
• Corrections never alter the historical version; previous versions remain accessible or archived.