Transparency

We always verify using the same standards, without leaning towards any particular side. We follow the same process for each fact-check and let the evidence determine our conclusions. We do not defend or take sides on the facts we fact-check.

See > Impartiality and equity policy

We want our community to be able to verify our findings on their own. We provide all sources in a detailed manner so that the community can replicate our work, except in cases where the personal safety of a particular source may be compromised.

In addition, the organization is committed to protecting the privacy rights and mental well-being of those involved in journalistic work, as well as preserving the independence and integrity of journalism in relation to content sources, applying ethical and professional procedures in all its informational practices.

See > Source transparency policy

We are transparent about our funding sources. If we accept funds from other organizations, we ensure that they do not influence the conclusions we reach in our reports. We provide detailed professional backgrounds of all organizational figures.

See > Funding

We explain the methodology we use for selecting, investigating, writing, editing, publishing and correcting our fact-checks. We encourage our readers to submit statements for fact-checking, and we are transparent about the reasons and methods by which we fact-check.

See > Methodology

We publish our corrections policy and strictly adhere to it. We correct in a clear and transparent manner according to our policy, to ensure that our community has access to the corrected version.

See > Updates and corrections policy

Physicist Julio Aranovich, chemist Roberto Lugo, and economist José Alberto Bekinschtein founded Chequeado in 2010. As part of the Fundación La Voz Pública (The Public Voice Foundation), it has a Board of Directors formed by a president, a treasurer and 4 board members: all professionals linked to the fields of Law, Economics, Sociology, Political Science and Technology. Additionally, it has an Advisory Board which consists of nationally and internationally recognized researchers, journalists and communicators who provide diverse and high-quality advice.

The content production at Chequeado is led by the Executive and Journalistic Director, Pablo M. Fernández, who oversees a staff of journalists and communicators responsible for editing, producing, fact-checking, publishing and disseminating the journalistic pieces. The organization also includes professionals in the fields of education, innovation (technology, communication and design), impact and research, administration, and institutional development.

No. Chequeado is a non-governmental, non-partisan, non-profit organization. And, as such, it does not have an owner. It was founded in 2010 by Julio Aranovich, José Alberto Bekinschtein and Roberto Lugo, and it is managed by a Board of Directors that ensures its economic and financial viability. The Board establishes the organization’s operating rules, approves the budget and annual work plan, and periodically evaluates and monitors the institution’s programs. The team working permanently at the organization is employed by Chequeado.

No. Chequeado is the main project of the Fundación La Voz Pública para la Verificación del Discurso Público (The Public Voice for Public Discourse Verification Foundation), a non-governmental, non-partisan and non-profit organization whose objective is to improve public debate to strengthen the democratic system. Its founders are three Argentine professionals (Julio Aranovich, Roberto Lugo, and José Alberto Bekinschtein) who do not come from politics or the media. Inspired by the American site FactCheck.org and as disillusioned media consumers, they created an organization focused on fact-checking in Argentina to provide data and evidence to public discussions and encourage critical thinking in society.

The Fundación La Voz Pública para la Verificación del Discurso Público (The Public Voice for Public Discourse Verification Foundation) is a non-governmental, non-partisan and non-profit organization established in 2011, and authorized to operate as such by Resolution No. 1392 of the General Inspection of Justice (see more in Accountability). To ensure our sustainability and independence, we have a diversified funding strategy that involves a balance between various sources of financing:

• Individual donors
• Support from companies
• Chequeado’s own activities (such as spaces in other media, organization of workshops and events on public discourse verification)
• International cooperation

In addition, they hold an annual fundraising event during Journalist’s Week.

No, we do not receive funds from authorities in Argentina (at national, provincial or local level). One of our objectives is to strengthen the democratic system by fact-checking the statements of its officials. To maintain editorial independence, we have decided not to receive Argentine public funds to finance our work.

We have a transparent working method and a diversified and transparent financing strategy aimed at having multiple and different ways of sustaining ourselves. By depending on a little from many sources, we do not rely heavily on anyone or any specific source, allowing us to carry out our work without being influenced. Those who support us know and understand this (as it is stated in our agreements). Our commitment to the community is to provide unrestricted information without exceptions.

At Chequeado, we produce different types of articles. The ones that have ratings are the fact-checks of public figures (politicians, social leaders, opinion makers, businesspeople) and the verifications of disinformations. For the fact-checks, we take a statement and analyze if it matches the facts and the best available data and, based on our 8-step method, we give it a rating. For the verifications, in which we analyze viral contents, we evaluate their veracity by using the same 8-step method and assigning a rating.

In addition, ever since Chequeado is online, we also produce other types of content that don’t have ratings and aim to provide context to public issues and debates. These include the “Explicadores” (Explanators), where we explain a topic that is being discussed, based on a phenomenon or event rather than on a specific statement; or “Hilando Fino” (Thinning the Thread), which are generally shorter articles that analyze a specific aspect of a topic or share results from a relevant study and/or investigation. The reason why these articles don’t always start with a specific statement or content is that sometimes there are no relevant statements (verifiable and assertive) that allow us to address the topic comprehensively, or because a general explanation helps better understand the complexities of a topic.

We are a non-partisan organization with a diverse team, a method and an editing process that involves at least three people reviewing each piece of content. We make sure to fact-check figures from different areas and located across the political spectrum so that our community can see that we fact-check everyone and do it with the same standard.

We can’t fact-check everything circulating in public discourse, so we have to choose to focus on certain content. When it comes to public figures or media outlets, we use two criteria: the reach that the person or institution has in the public space, meaning how many people heard or read the statement, and the relevance of the topic discussed. For example, if the President says “We are 40 million Argentinians,” we wouldn’t fact-check it because even though it’s a relevant figure with a large audience, it’s a statement of little significance since there is currently no controversy around its veracity, so we wouldn’t contribute much to the debate by fact-checking it.

In the case of disinformations circulating on social media, we take into account how viral they are, meaning how many people were exposed to them, according to certain virality thresholds on each network or platform, and how harmful they could be if considered true by the community. For Chequeado, disinformation that can affect people’s lives or health is a priority.

In 2018, Chequeado signed an agreement with Facebook to act as an autonomous and independent fact-checker (third-party fact-checker) in Argentina and to provide our debunkings to users who have seen the disinformation content. As part of this agreement, we have access to a platform developed by Facebook with links to content shared on the social network or Instagram that could be false. Based on journalistic relevance criteria, we select the links and apply Chequeado’s fact-checking method to verify the information and assign a rating. The Facebook and Instagram teams do not participate in the process. All fact-checks conducted by Chequeado under this initiative are published here and here.

Anyone can fact-check Chequeado and, once a year, we undergo an external evaluation and certification process conducted by the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN), which is unprecedented in the media industry.

Regarding our organization itself, we provide on our website transparency about who we are, how we work and our financing model.

In terms of each fact-check, the conclusions and ratings are based on the data presented, which is always made available to readers through links and consulted specialists. Any conflicts of interest, if applicable, are indicated in each article. In other words: we don’t want you to believe us simply because we say something; we show you why we claim something to be true or false so that you can draw your own conclusions. If you have comments or doubts, you can always send us a message through the various channels we have open for our community, including email, social media (@chequeado), WhatsApp, or our website.

Chequeado strives for maximum rigor and accuracy. But, as it is known, nobody is perfect. Therefore, we are committed to rectifying any inaccurate information we may have published. We have a Policy of Updates and Corrections as part of our method and our commitment as an organization certified by the IFCN.

If someone alerts Chequeado of a possible error in an article, the team will take a maximum of 48 hours to review the questioned content and, if necessary, publish a correction. Once it is verified that an error was indeed made and incorrect data was published, it will be replaced and an explanation of the modification will be provided under the title “Correction,” along with the date of publication. If it is necessary to assign a new rating, the original rating under which the article was published will also be stated. When relevant information is received after a fact-check has been published, which complements or clarifies the article or updates the data, it will be included with an explanation of its relevance under the title “Update,” also with the date.

Yes. Different studies show that, after seeing a fact-check, people tend to respond more accurately to questions about specific information and data (see, for example here, here y here). In Argentina, research conducted by academics Ernesto Calvo and Natalia Aruguete on the impact of Chequeado in the 2019 elections shows that seeing something classified as false does not necessarily change people’s opinions, but it does change their behavior by reducing the incentive to share disinformation or evidence-free content on social media. A similar situation occurs with political leaders: according to a study conducted in the United States, candidates who were warned about being fact-checked had fewer false statements than those who were not notified (see more here).