Décrypteurs

Organization: Décrypteurs
Applicant: Jeff Yates
Assessor: Margot Susca

Background

Decrypteurs is the fact checking arm of Radio Canada. Its role is clearly stated as is its links to the larger public radio operation. I do wish there were clearer articulation between the Decrypteurs site and the Radio Canada site, but it is not enough of an issue that I have marked any sections as noncompliant.                          

Assessment Conclusion

I mark the site as compliant in all areas after a review of its links to Radio Canada, its staff and bios, a sample of its fact checks, its sources and its methodology. 

on 12-Oct-2020 (9 months ago)

Margot Susca assesses application as Compliant

A short summary in native publishing language

The site is fully compliant and offers users ways to learn about and combat disinformation and misinformation on its website, social, tv, and through a newsletter. 

Section 1: Eligibility to be a signatory

To be eligible to be a signatory, applicants must meet these six criteria

  • 1.1 The applicant is a legally registered organization, or a distinct team or unit within a legally registered organization, and details of this are easily found on its website.
  • 1.2 The team, unit or organization is set up exclusively for the purpose of fact-checking.
  • 1.3 The applicant has published an average of at least one fact check a week over the course of the six months prior to the date of application. For applicants from countries with at least 5 or more verified signatories need to have at least a fact check a week over the twelve months of publishing track. Consult to factchecknet@poynter.org for confirmation.
  • 1.4 On average, at least 75% of the applicant’s fact checks focus on claims related to issues that, in the view of the IFCN, relate to or could have an impact on the welfare or well-being of individuals, the general public or society.
  • 1.5 The applicant’s editorial output is not, in the view of the IFCN, controlled by the state, a political party or politician.
  • 1.6 If the organization receives funding from local or foreign state or political sources, it provides a statement on its site setting out to the satisfaction of the IFCN, how it ensures its funders do not influence the findings of its reports.

Criteria 1.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please explain where on your website you set out information about your organization’s legal status and how this complies with criteria. Attach a link to the relevant page of your website.

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago

Décrypteurs is the fact-checking project of Radio-Canada, Canada's public broadcaster. Radio-Canada is funded by the federal government, but its neutrality is strictly protected by the Radio Telecommunications Act.

You can read about Radio-Canada's neutrality and journalistic standards here: https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/vision/governance/journalistic-standards-and-practices

Décrypteurs website is here: https://ici.radio-canada.ca/decrypteurs

I will add that our team of only three people published over 70 fact-checks about the COVID-19 pandemic.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Decrypteurs is the fact checking arm of Radio Canada. Its role is clearly stated as is its links to the larger public radio operation. 


done_all 1.1 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 1.2
Proof you meet criteria
Please answer the following questions – (see notes in Guidelines for Application on how to answer)

 1. When and why was your fact-checking operation started?
 2. How many people work or volunteer in the organization and what are their roles?
 3. What different activities does your organization carry out?
 4. What are the goals of your fact-checking operation over the coming year?

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago

1. The team was created in February 2019. It was put in place because as public broadcaster, Radio-Canada felt that its role included helping people navigate dis- and mis-information.

2. Décrypteurs is made up of two full-time journalists. A third person, who is the host of our weekly TV show, also does some fact-checking articles from time to time.

3. The core of our activities is writing online fact checks and investigations into dis and mis-information, as well as online radicalization. We also have a weekly TV show which ran for 37 episodes last year. This year, it will run from October to May. We also are routinely called upon by other TV and radio shows to explain or analyze current events in the disinformation sphere.

4. We want to continue developing our online content and TV show, as well as look at other possible avenues, such as a podcast.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. Its staff list is clearly accessible on the home page with descriptions and biographies of each. Screen shot attached. 

Files Attached
Screen Shot 2020-10-... (671 KB)
done_all 1.2 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 1.3
Proof you meet criteria
- The applicant has published an average of at least one fact check a week over the course of the six months prior to the date of application.
- For applicants from countries with at least 5 or more verified signatories need to have at least a fact check a week over the twelve months of publishing track.
- Consult to factchecknet@poynter.org for confirmation.

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago

You can look at our fact-checks here, under the header "Nos vérifications": https://ici.radio-canada.ca/decrypteurs


Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Decrypteurs publishes regular fact checks. 


done_all 1.3 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 1.4
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will assess compliance through a review of the fact checks published over the previous three months. No additional information required.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

I have included a screen shot of the "Featured" fact checks on the Decrypteurs website (as the site is in French, I have used Google Translate to read the website in English). You can see that all of these fact checks in the featured section reviewed on Oct. 2, 2020 deal with the site's fact checks related to coronavirus (although not all were originally published in the last three months). The site has had a robust series of fact checks on the virus including a Sept. 22 post under the headline: "No, this image does not prove that COVID-19 tests were circulating in 2018." A great feature/mission detected on the site is its commitment to not just fact checking, but also to relay tips on spotting and combatting misinformation. 

A Sept. 14, 2020 article under the headline, "No, the NY Times did not say 90% of positive coronavirus tests were false" fact checks misleading claims made in a video about positivity rates. 

Another from June 2020 under the headline, "No, this graph does not prove that the COVID-19 outbreak has been exaggerated. The data is true, but does not illustrate the situation well. In addition, there is more recent data" staffers noted the following information about interpreting data. They wrote, "However, this graphic does not tell the whole story. The death curve lags behind the [COVID-19] case curve (between 1 and 3 weeks) since the transmission and clinical course of the disease takes time, which may explain why there does not seem to be any excess mortality in March , explains Madalina Burtan, communications advisor at the National Institute of Public Health of Quebec (INSPQ). Indeed, if the government of Quebec declared a state of health emergency on March 14, the majority of deaths related to COVID-19 occurred during the months of April and May.﻿ (New window)﻿. However, care must be taken when comparing death figures from one year to the next. There is a lot of variation between years, Ms. Burtan warns. Given the aging of the population, the number of deaths is increasing every year."

In its fact checks, generated through a read of what's going viral, outside of coronavirus, it reported on false claims a reporter was shown on TV being hugged against her will. It wrote, "No, these men are not this journalist's spouse or bodyguard. The journalist and her union strongly denied these rumors." It continues in the article, "Ms. Bourassa also strongly denied these rumors on her Facebook page, where she shared the CUPE publication and the Journal de Québec article. 'The 2 men do not know each other and do not know me! Once again the conspirators who think these men are my friends / spouse / brother-in-law / bodyguard / brother / cousin .... there, it is he himself who says it,' she wrote in sharing the interview﻿ by M. Mongrain." 





Files Attached
Screen Shot 2020-10-... (2 MB)
done_all 1.4 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 1.5
Proof you meet criteria
Please explain any commercial, financial and/or institutional relationship your organization has to the state, politicians or political parties in the country or countries you cover. Also explain funding or support received from foreign as well as local state or political actors over the previous financial year.

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago

As I said, Radio-Canada is funded by the Candian government, but it is neutral and independant, as assured by the Radio and Telecommunications Act. 

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Radio Canada is neutral and independent. I believe Decrypteurs may want to link directly to this policy from its own website rather than relying on this statement on the main organization's page. 


done_all 1.5 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 1.6
Proof you meet criteria
If you confirmed the organization receives funding from local or foreign state or political sources, provide a link to where on your website you set out how you ensure the editorial independence of your work.

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

I mark this section as compliant, but I note that Decrypteurs may wish to distinguish its fact check site or post this link to Radio Canada's policies more clearly on its own fact check site. 


done_all 1.6 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Section 2: A commitment to Non-partisanship and Fairness

To be compliant on nonpartisanship and fairness, applicants must meet these five criteria

  • 2.1 The applicant fact-checks using the same high standards of evidence and judgement for equivalent claims regardless of who made the claim.
  • 2.2 The applicant does not unduly concentrate its fact-checking on any one side, considers the reach and importance of claims it selects to check and publishes a short statement on its website to set out how it selects claims to check.
  • 2.3 The applicant discloses in its fact checks relevant interests of the sources it quotes where the reader might reasonably conclude those interests could influence the accuracy of the evidence provided. It also discloses in its fact checks any commercial or other such relationships it has that a member of the public might reasonably conclude could influence the findings of the fact check.
  • 2.4 The applicant is not as an organization affiliated with nor declares or shows support for any party, any politician or political candidate, nor does it advocate for or against any policy positions on any issues save for transparency and accuracy in public debate.
  • 2.5 The applicant sets out its policy on non-partisanship for staff on its site. Save for the issues of accuracy and transparency, the applicant’s staff do not get involved in advocacy or publicise their views on policy issues the organization might fact check in such a way as might lead a reasonable member of the public to see the organization’s work as biased.

Criteria 2.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please share links to 10 fact checks published over the past year that you believe demonstrate your non-partisanship.
Please briefly explain how the fact checks selected show that (I) you use the same high standards of evidence for equivalent claims, (II) follow the same essential process for every fact check and (III) let the evidence dictate your conclusions.

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1356842/mensonges-campagne-electorale-federale-canada

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1352533/campagne-destruction-parti-populaire-canada-maxime-bernier

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1719652/document-masque-exemption-commision-droits-personne-fraude

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1710549/fondation-barack-obama-image-george-floyd-conspiration-qanon

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1708923/adolf-hitler-donald-trump-bible-photo-manipulee

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1493777/chine-scientifiques-winnipeg-coronavirus-laboratoire-espions

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1308529/non-residents-canadiens-etranger-vote-elections-federales-verification

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1707657/vrais-complots-histoire-watergate-mk-ultra-tuskegee-irak-theories-conspirationnistes-covid-19-coronavirus

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1306413/brenda-lucki-commissaire-grc-fausse-rumeur-mari-cousin-bill-morneau

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1219514/north-99-groupe-gauche-petitions-trompeuses-donnees-elections-federales-2019


As a rule, we do not fact-check statements by politicians, electoral platforms or speeches. Per our methodology, we only cover things that are going viral on social media. We also prioritize questions that readers send us. During the last federal election, we fact-checked a few political subjects. In all cases, these had do do either with pieces of disinformation circulting online, or looking into various groups trying to sway voters. In all cases, we let the facts speak for themselves. As stated in our methodology, we are not interested in opinions. We try to rely on political sources as little as possible, preferring to cite relevant experts or data. One example where we would use a political source, for example, is to get an official statement on a piece of misinformation circulating online which directly concerns a politician, for example if people are falsely claiming that the chief of the federal police is the cousin of a cabinet minister. In such an instance, it may be appropriate to seek a comment. However, we do not rely on such statements only, and always rely on our own reporting, regardless of political statements.

In all our articles, we strive to be as transparent as possible. All claims we make are either accompanied by a link that people can read for themselves, or rely on interviews with relevant experts. In these cases, we explain why the expert in question is qualified to make such statements. We strive to consult various independant experts and fact-check what they tell us.

Whomever or whatever the target of a piece of disinformation is, we treat them the same way and apply the same standards in deciding whether we issue a fact-check or not, namely, the degree to which a piece of disinformation is going viral and the potential harm it may cause.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. The last link to a fact check provided here falls outside the 12 month window stipulated, but I believe I have reviewed enough material on the site outside of it to judge the site as compliant. 


done_all 2.1 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 2.2
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to a place on your website where you explain how you select claims to check, explaining how you ensure you do not unduly concentrate your fact-checking on any one side, and how you consider the reach and importance of the claims you select to check.

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago

We have a section on our website where we lay out our exct methodology and process in choosing what topics to cover and how we verify claims: https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1166831/decrypteurs-methodologie-verifications-faits-desinformation

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. Translated methodology attached. It is clear and could be easily replicated. 

Files Attached
Screen Shot 2020-10-... (223 KB)
done_all 2.2 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 2.3
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will assess compliance through a review of the fact checks published over the previous year. No additional information required.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Four of my reviews: 

1. As an example of its mission to combat general misinformation and in step with its explanation of generating fact check tips from readers/citizens is a March 17, 2020 article focused specifically on erupting misinformation as coronavirus spread to North America. Its headline reads, "Coronavirus: do not share anything before following these steps! Precautions are needed to avoid sharing misinformation about COVID-19."

2. Decrypteurs in the realm of combatting one-sided information also addressed the spread of right-wing American news outlet Epoch Times into Canada after receiving several inquiries from citizens. Under the May 8 headline: "Unease over free distribution of The Epoch Times" the authors wrote, "The Epoch Times is pro-Trump media crusading against the Chinese Communist Party. Several readers wrote in to Décrypteurs asking about seeing The Epoch Times circulating in Canada." Decrypteurs used Political Science Assistant Professor Marie-Ève Reny's statement to provide context for the right-wing media organization's role. And, the Decrypteurs team further explored its origins and founding. Its objective assessment of the Epoch Times reveals, "But this rather reliable content rubs shoulders with half-truths and inaccuracies in this publication distributed across Canada in both official languages." It goes even further providing the results of a study that examined 5,400 Epoch Times articles to explain a different professor's work and findings that "This is where you see that it is a newspaper which is used primarily to discredit the Chinese regime. It's an opinion journal."

3. An April 15 article under the headline: No, dialing a secret code does not tell if your phone is being spied on. Dialing * # 21 # is used to check the status of call forwarding" debunks a myth circulation got Facebook that dialing that sequence. the fact check notes: "his message, which appeared on the Spotted Policiers Zelés page, which generally publishes images or texts about the police sent to it by its subscribers, has been shared more than 2000 times. It was posted online a few days after the SQ confirmed it could geotag the cell phones of citizens infected with COVID-19 who refuse to go into isolation. However, dialing * # 21 # does not tell if your phone is being spied on. When you enter this number in the Phone application, the screen turns gray and shows the status of the various call forwarding features on the device. It is for this reason that the word "deactivated" appears."

4. A June 2020 fact check marked "true" a viral statement on fruit and pests, noting, "Yes, small insects can hide in your strawberries. But rest assured, they are not dangerous."

The site also offers a TV/video series "A year of disinformation" focusing on issues in Quebec, Science, Education, and Health and Nutrition. I should note that I am unable to access these and receive the follow message: "In accordance with broadcasting rights, the selected content is not available in your country." I note it here as an interesting multimedia element, and it does not influence my ability to assess the veracity of the other fact checks listed in my review. 



done_all 2.3 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 2.4
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will assess compliance through a review of the fact checks published over the previous year. No additional information required.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

See above please. 


done_all 2.4 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 2.5
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to a place on your website where you publish a statement setting out your policy on non-partisanship for staff and how it ensures the organization meets this criteria.

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago

This is covered by Radio-Canada's journalistic Standards and Practices, which apply to all Radio-Canada journalists, including us at Décrypteurs. https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/vision/governance/journalistic-standards-and-practices

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Again, I note Radio Canada has clear links to its policies, but it may be helpful to have this stated directly on the Decrypteurs page or prominently linked from it. 


done_all 2.5 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Section 3: A commitment to Standards and Transparency of Sources

To be compliant on sources, applicants must meet these four criteria

  • 3.1 The applicant identifies the source of all significant evidence used in their fact checks, providing relevant links where the source is available online, in such a way that users can replicate their work if they wish. In cases where identifying the source would compromise the source’s personal security, the applicant provides as much detail as compatible with the source’s safety.
  • 3.2 The applicant uses the best available primary, not secondary, sources of evidence wherever suitable primary sources are available. Where suitable primary sources are not available, the applicant explains the use of a secondary source.
  • 3.3 The applicant checks all key elements of claims against more than one named source of evidence save where the one source is the only source relevant on the topic.
  • 3.4 The applicant identifies in its fact checks the relevant interests of the sources it uses where the reader might reasonably conclude those interests could influence the accuracy of the evidence provided.

Criteria 3.1
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the applicant’s use of sources in a randomised sample of its fact checks to assess compliance. No additional evidence is required.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

The Epoch Times review cited a professor and expert plus used an independent research study to fact check concerns brought by citizens about The Epoch Times circulating there. That is one example of a review of sources, and that review shows a clear articulation of how and who Decrypteurs contacted.  


done_all 3.1 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 3.2
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the applicant’s use of sources in a randomised sample of its fact checks to assess compliance. No additional evidence is required.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

The telephone story mentioned above used the following source: Call forwarding is used to redirect incoming calls to another phone number. It does not allow authorities to track or monitor you, according to specialists interviewed for this article. 'I don't know of any way to do this as described in the publication,' argues the chief cybersecurity officer at Commissionaires du Québec, Jean-Philippe Décarie-Mathieu. 'If it was an IP telephony system [which consists of making calls over Internet networks], that's another game , because it's configurable and hackable , like any computer system. But cellular systems are different. These are rather opaque closed networks ,' he explains."


done_all 3.2 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 3.3
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the applicant’s use of sources in a randomised sample of its fact checks to assess compliance. No additional evidence is required.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

As an example, one from June 3, 2020 under the headline "This photo where Hitler is compared to Trump has been manipulated. The person who did the photomontage tried to prevent internet users from finding the original photo" fact check staff were able to do a reverse image search to determine a doctored photo likening Trump holding a Bible to Hitler doing the same. It was a fake. Staffer Yates wrote, "However, the photo of Adolf Hitler has been manipulated. In the original, he does not hold a Bible, but simply waves to the crowd."


done_all 3.3 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 3.4
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the applicant’s use of sources in a randomised sample of its fact checks to assess compliance. No additional evidence is required.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

An August 2020 piece headlined, "Understand the QAnon movement to better talk to those close to them," goes on "The deeper a person gets into QAnon, the more they feel they have more in common with other followers than with those close to them." It begins, "If you clicked on this link, it is because you are interested in the QAnon phenomenon, this increasingly popular conspiracy movement. It may be that someone close to you is an adept and you are looking to understand their world. It's even possible that you have heard of QAnon and are not sure if this conspiracy is trustworthy. In Canada, for example, some QAnon supporters claim that President Trump is about to arrest Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Others argued earlier this year that it had already been done, and that the Prime Minister's voluntary isolation following the COVID-19 diagnosis of his wife, Sophie Grégoire, in March, was in fact a pretext for hide his incarceration." 

The work goes on to use sources including: Concordia University researcher Marc-André Argentino who researches the QAnon phenomenon and two NBC investigative reporters. These sources are acceptable, but I do wish this piece had done more to plug into the researchers who study online disinformation and conspiracy theories, and this also ties to methodological approach listed and marked compliant below. 


done_all 3.4 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Section 4: A commitment to Transparency of Funding & Organization

To be compliant on funding and organization, applicants must meet these five criteria

  • 4.1 Applicants that are independent organizations have a page on their website detailing each source of funding accounting for 5% or more of total revenue for its previous financial year. This page also sets out the legal form in which the organization is registered (e.g. as a non-profit, as a company etc).
  • 4.2 Applicants that are the fact-checking section or unit of a media house or other parent organization make a statement on ownership.
  • 4.3 A statement on the applicant’s website sets out the applicant’s organizational structure and makes clear how and by whom editorial control is exercised.
  • 4.4 A page on the applicant’s website details the professional biography of all those who, according to the organizational structure and play a significant part in its editorial output.
  • 4.5 The applicant provides easy means on its website and/or via social media for users to communicate with the editorial team.

Criteria 4.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please confirm whether you are an ‘independent organization’
or ‘the fact-checking section or unit of a media house or other parent organization’ and share proof of this organizational status.

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago

Yes, we are the fact-checking unit of Radio-Canada, Canada's public broadcaster.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. You can easily see a Radio Canada link at the top of Decrypteurs' home page (top left). 

Files Attached
Screen Shot 2020-10-... (1 MB)
done_all 4.1 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 4.2
Proof you meet criteria
If your organization is an “independent organization”, please share a link to the page on your website where you detail your funding and indicate the legal form in which the organization is registered (e.g. as a non-profit, as a company etc).
If your organization is “the fact-checking section or unit of a media house or other parent organization”, please share a link to the statement on your website about your ownership.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. The website states, "Décrypteurs is the Radio-Canada team that fights against disinformation. Its mission: to help citizens disentangle the true from the false on social networks, analyze the mechanisms that contribute to the spread of fake news and highlight certain emerging web phenomena. This is who we are and how we work."


done_all 4.2 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 4.3
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to where on your website you set out your organizational structure, making clear how and by whom editorial control is exercised.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. This page included in the application notes the mission, structure and staff. It is clear and includes contact information and biographical information. 


done_all 4.3 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 4.4
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to where on your website you set out the professional biographies of those who play a significant part in your organization’s editorial output.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. (I noted this above in staffing section. Forgive the redundancy, but I've included a screen shot here for thoroughness and this was reviewed through a different link meaning that it is accessible to the audience.)

Files Attached
Screen Shot 2020-10-... (233 KB)
done_all 4.4 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 4.5
Proof you meet criteria
Please share a link to where on your website you encourage users to communicate with your editorial team.

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. The site explains, "Our team tracks down false information that spreads on social networks. His mission? Fight disinformation and bring to light the darkest corners of the web. To contact us: decrypteurs@radio-canada.ca ." It also allows interested parties to subscribe to its newsletter, which I think is a nice addition. Its site says, "Unravel the true from the false on the web! Subscribe to our newsletter to help you spot fake news." 


done_all 4.5 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Section 5: A commitment to Standards and Transparency of Methodology

To be compliant on methodology, applicants must meet these six criteria

  • 5.1 The applicant publishes on its website a statement about the methodology it uses to select, research, write and publish its fact checks.
  • 5.2 The applicant selects claims to check based primarily on the reach and importance of the claims, and where possible explains the reason for choosing the claim to check.
  • 5.3 The applicant sets out in its fact checks relevant evidence that appears to support the claim as well as relevant evidence that appears to undermine it.
  • 5.4 The applicant in its fact checks assesses the merits of the evidence found using the same high standards applied to evidence on equivalent claims, regardless of who made the claim.
  • 5.5 The applicant seeks where possible to contact those who made the claim to seek supporting evidence, noting that (I) this is often not possible with online claims, (II) if the person who makes the claim fails to reply in a timely way this should not impede the fact check, (III) if a speaker adds caveats to the claim, the fact-checker should be free to continue with checking the original claim, (IV) fact-checkers may not wish to contact the person who made the claim for safety or other legitimate reasons.
  • 5.6 The applicant encourages users to send in claims to check, while making it clear what readers can legitimately expect will be fact-checked and what isn’t fact-checkable.

Criteria 5.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please provide a link to the statement on your website that explains the methodology you use to select, research, write and publish your fact checks.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. The methodology is clear and in service to fighting disinformation. 


done_all 5.1 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 5.2
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the methodology used in a randomised sample of your fact checks to assess compliance with these criteria. No additional evidence is required.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Methodology and sources were reviewed for the same fact checks listed above. As an example, here the source and methodology are two sides of the same proverbial coin. As an example, one from June 3, 2020 under the headline "This photo where Hitler is compared to Trump has been manipulated. The person who did the photomontage tried to prevent internet users from finding the original photo" fact check staff were able to do a reverse image search to determine a doctored photo likening Trump holding a Bible to Hitler doing the same. It was a fake. Staffer Yates wrote, "However, the photo of Adolf Hitler has been manipulated. In the original, he does not hold a Bible, but simply waves to the crowd." The methodology here included finding the original Hitler pic and explaining it in relation to the doctored one. 


done_all 5.2 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 5.3
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the methodology used in a randomised sample of your fact checks to assess compliance with these criteria. No additional evidence is required.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. The methodology of confirmation is included in the reviews above. You can see that its methodology to fight disinformation may include a reliance on experts--either academic research or through interviews. Here experts were called in: The telephone story mentioned above used the following source: Call forwarding is used to redirect incoming calls to another phone number. It does not allow authorities to track or monitor you, according to specialists interviewed for this article. 'I don't know of any way to do this as described in the publication,' argues the chief cybersecurity officer at Commissionaires du Québec, Jean-Philippe Décarie-Mathieu. 'If it was an IP telephony system [which consists of making calls over Internet networks], that's another game , because it's configurable and hackable , like any computer system. But cellular systems are different. These are rather opaque closed networks ,' he explains."


done_all 5.3 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 5.4
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the methodology used in a randomised sample of your fact checks to assess compliance with these criteria. No additional evidence is required.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. The Epoch Times piece refers to multiple expert sources to explain both the dissemination of and point of The Epoch Times. 


done_all 5.4 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 5.5
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the methodology used in a randomised sample of your fact checks to assess compliance with these criteria. No additional evidence is required.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. The QAnon story/work relied on earlier news reports. I mark this as compliant, but I am at times weary of fact checking sites that rely on news reports as opposed to statements made by officials in news reports. I think here this example could have sought deeper experts on these radical underground communities moving mainstream. 


done_all 5.5 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 5.6
Proof you meet criteria
Please describe how you encourage users to send in claims to check, while making it clear what readers can legitimately expect will be fact-checked and what isn’t fact-checkable. Include links where appropriate. If you do not allow this, explain why.

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago

Our website contains our email address. We also have a Twitter account and a Facebook group, where we routinely encourage the audience to send us questions or things to fact-check. We also ask the viewers of our TV show to write to us. We have received about 4000 emails since the beginning of the pandemic.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

They provide quotes from those viewers/users. 


done_all 5.6 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Section 6: A commitment to an Open & Honest Corrections Policy

To be compliant on corrections policy, applicants must meet these five criteria

  • 6.1 The applicant has a corrections or complaints policy that is easily visible and accessible on the organization’s website or frequently referenced in broadcasts.
  • 6.2 The policy sets out clear definitions of what it does and does not cover, how major mistakes, especially those requiring revised conclusions of a fact check, are handled, and the fact that some complaints may justify no response. This policy is adhered to scrupulously.
  • 6.3 Where credible evidence is provided that the applicant has made a mistake worthy of correction, the applicant makes a correction openly and transparently, seeking as far as possible to ensure that users of the original see the correction and the corrected version.
  • 6.4 The applicant, if an existing signatory, should either on its corrections/complaints page or on the page where it declares itself an IFCN signatory inform users that if they believe the signatory is violating the IFCN Code, they may inform the IFCN, with a link to the IFCN site.
  • 6.5 If the applicant is the fact-checking unit of a media company, it is a requirement of signatory status that the parent media company has and adheres to an open and honest corrections policy.

Criteria 6.1
Proof you meet criteria
Please provide a link to where you publish on your website your corrections or complaints policy. If you are primarily a broadcaster, please provide evidence you frequently reference your corrections policy in broadcasts.

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago

This is covered by Radio-Canada's journalistic Standards and Practices. https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/vision/governance/journalistic-standards-and-practices

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. Again, it is governed by Radio Canada's standards. It may wish to have a box or list on its main page that points back there to explain this governing structure. 


done_all 6.1 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 6.2
Proof you meet criteria
The assessor will review the corrections policy to verify it meets critera. No additional information needed.

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. I do think the Decrypteurs site should improve the corrections policy as a link to its site rather than simply linking to the Radio Canada site. 


done_all 6.2 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 6.3
Proof you meet criteria
Please provide a short statement about how the policy was adhered to over the previous year (or six months if this is the first application) including evidence of two examples of the responses provided by the applicant to a correction request over the previous year. Where no correction request has been made in the previous year, you must state this in your application, which will be publicly available in the assessment if your application is successful.

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago

We have not had to issue any major corrections. However, from time to time, we do issue updates when new information comes to light. For example, this article was updated with a statement from Facebook, which was not available at the time of publishing. https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1727508/facebook-video-theorie-complot-conspirationnisme-pandemie-covid

Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. Please note that there has not been any corrections in that time period. 


done_all 6.3 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 6.4
Proof you meet criteria
If you are an existing signatory, please provide a link to show where on your site you inform users that if they believe you are violating the IFCN Code, they may inform the IFCN of this, with a link to the complaints page on the IFCN site.

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant, and I see that the link works for anyone who wished to lodge a complaint. 

Files Attached
Screen Shot 2020-10-... (73 KB)
done_all 6.4 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.

Criteria 6.5
Proof you meet criteria
If you are the fact-checking unit of a media company, please provide a link to the parent media company’s honest and open corrections policy and provide evidence that it adheres to this.

Décrypteurs
17-Aug-2020 (11 months ago) Updated: 11 months ago
Margot Susca Assessor
02-Oct-2020 (9 months ago) Updated: 9 months ago

Compliant. This links very clearly back to Radio Canada. 


done_all 6.5 marked as Compliant by Margot Susca.
https://ifcncodeofprinciples.poynter.org/application/public/decrypteurs/449CF6B6-ADE6-CFEE-5632-4E46F9E5D907
ifcncodeofprinciples.poynter.org
crawl=CC-MAIN-2021-31
148155
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:HOD556ZVEL7UOOCNZ6HVC5SOFSIBILFL
<urn:uuid:c9382356-0afb-41dd-ad7f-85f97f4de3da>
2021-07-31T02:10:32Z
78.47.23.83
text/html
sha1:AY7MVSS4ROAOTJJQFFQMEFZSP5SXNT3X
<urn:uuid:46cafb9e-b25a-4a34-a653-d4c6b078b21b>
https://ifcncodeofprinciples.poynter.org/application/public/decrypteurs/449CF6B6-ADE6-CFEE-5632-4E46F9E5D907
response
<urn:uuid:42490fb1-2c58-4843-899e-dffd63f53a2b>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-31
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for July/August 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-129.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/