Factoids under the microscope: instructions for checking
Factoids are the viruses of the information space. They mutate, adapt, and infect even the most cautious. But if there are vaccines against COVID-19, then only the “immunity” of critical thinking will protect against media fakes. How to develop it? Let’s look at it step by step.
Verifying of factoids requires critical thinking and reliable tools. Step-by-step verification instructions:
1. Check the source. Who published the information?
– Official media (BBC, Reuters, AP) → more reliable.
– Unknown sites, blogs, social networks → high probability of fakes.
– Check the domain: fake sites often copy names (for example, “ВВС-news.ru” instead of “BBC.com”).
– Evaluate the site: is there an editorial office, contacts, publication date.
Tools:
– Media Bias/Fact Check — checking media bias.
– Whois — information about the site owner.
2. Find the original source. Is there a link to the study, official statement, or data?
– If not → that’s a red flag.
– If there is → find the original (e.g. a scientific article on PubMed or a report on a government website).
For example: Statement “Scientists have proven that X causes cancer” → look for publication in a peer-reviewed journal (Nature, JAMA, etc.).
Where to look:
– Google Scholar — scientific works.
– Official websites of organizations (WHO, UN, CIA World Factbook).
3. Cross-check. Is this mentioned in other sources?
– If only one website or telegram channel writes about the “sensation” → most likely it is fake.
– Compare how the topic is presented in different countries (for example, through Google News).
Tools:
– News Guard — assessment of media credibility.
– Ground News — comparison of topic coverage in different countries.
4. Check dates and context. Is the information out of date?
– Old news can be passed off as current (for example, photos of a disaster from 10 years ago).
– Look for specific numbers, dates, names. If they are missing, it is suspicious.
– Use reverse image search
– Check metadata (EXIF)
– Look for the original publication: often the same photos are used for different events.
Tools:
– Google Images or TinEye — will help you find the original and the publication date.
– Foto Forensics — will help you find out the file metadata.
5. Analysis of language and emotions. Does the statement contain signs of manipulation?
– Too emotional headlines (“SHOCK!”, “Sensational discovery!”).
– Generalizations (“All scientists agree…” — but in reality, there is no consensus).
– Lack of specific names, dates, places.
6. Check for debunking. The factoid may have already been debunked by fake researchers.
– Consult with expert communities.
– Turn to fact-checking platforms (Snopes, FactCheck.org, Lapsha, GFCN).
– Use platforms for asking questions to experts (The Question, ResearchGate).
7. Checking statistics. How is the data presented?
– Graphs with a truncated scale — the graph artificially increases the visual difference between values by cutting off the Y axis. For example, an increase from 1 to 3 cases (really +2) looks like a “huge jump of 200%”.
– Percentages without absolute numbers — use large percentages to hide tiny real values. For example: “Mortality increased by 50%!” sounds scary, but if there were 2 cases, and now there are 3, it is not an epidemic.
– Selected data — shows only “convenient” years or groups. For example, a graph of economic growth for 2020-2021, but hides the decline in 2019-2020.
How to check:
– Always look at what number the Y axis starts with.
– Look for raw data (numbers, not just percentages).
– Ask for absolute numbers (“50% of what?”).
– Compare to the baseline (an increase from 0.001% to 0.002% is also “+100%”, but not sensational).
– Check with primary sources (official reports from statistical services and organizations, WHO, Pew Research, not retellings in the media).
Tools:
– Our World in Data — correct graphs with transparent methodology.
– Gapminder — debunking myths about statistics.
– Statista — statistics database.
8. Be careful with quotes. Are words taken out of context?
– Find the full interview or speech (e.g. the phrase “doctors don’t know anything” may have been cut from the statement “…but that doesn’t mean doctors don’t know anything”).
Important: Even reliable media sometimes make mistakes. Always use multiple verification methods.
Information overload creates the perfect environment for manipulation — the important drowns in a sea of the unimportant, and bright factoids easily obscure modest facts. But right now, critical thinking is becoming more important than ever. Save this instruction — the next time another “sensation” tries to break through the information noise, you will be armed with proven verification methods. In a world where truth and fiction are just a click away, your attentiveness is the last line of defense against manipulation.