The Embarrassing Truth About Fact Checkers

With the political season heating up, the fact-checkers are about to take center stage. But here’s the question asked on behalf of an inquisitive public: why do we need them in the first place? Isn’t fact-checking supposed to be part of journalism’s core mission?

Why the media isn’t embarrassed that the job of verifying facts has been outsourced to a third party is a modern mystery. And it signals a much larger problem in today’s news landscape: the media has drifted away from its fundamental responsibility — reporting confirmed facts.

How big is the problem? Unfortunately, it’s all too easy to find examples of news done wrong. Remember the guy who tweeted false information about Superstorm Sandy that was picked up by news media? Thanks to him and unwitting yet willing journalists, it was widely reported the New York Stock Exchange flooded. (It didn’t.) Or that time they reported Pope Francis endorsed Donald Trump? (He didn’t.)

According to a 2021 Pew Research Center study, 62 percent of Americans believe that news organizations regularly report inaccurate or incomplete information. This isn’t just a perception problem — it’s a reality that stems from media outlets prioritizing speed over accuracy. In the 24-hour news cycle, it’s all about being first to report, even if that means publishing before all the facts are confirmed. Fact-checkers have become an integral part of today’s media landscape because they’re often left to clean up the mess left by rushed, incomplete reporting.

But here’s the kicker — The 24-hour news cycle is a relic of a pre-digital age. The constant drive to be the first to report is no longer relevant when the internet is already awash with updates, opinions, and noise. The truth is, it’s not about getting it first anymore — it’s about getting it right. Somebody alert the media.

Fact-checking used to be an integral part of the reporting process itself. Journalists didn’t publish a story until they had verified every fact, interviewed multiple sources, and ensured accuracy. The idea that fact-checking should come after information is published or broadcast is a recent development driven by the fast-paced and click-driven nature of today’s media. Take the coverage of natural disasters as another example. In 2017, after Hurricane Irma struck Florida, multiple media outlets reported that Miami International Airport was underwater, using viral images circulating on social media. The problem? Those images weren’t of the Miami airport at all — they were from a different location during a different storm. Fact-checkers had to step in later to clarify the mistake, but by then, the misinformation had already spread, diminishing the credibility of those news organizations.

This error reflects yet another issue in today’s news industry: the emphasis on using technology to enhance storytelling has eclipsed the basic responsibility of telling the truth. Yes, interactive graphics and flashy videos can make stories more engaging, but they don’t make up for a lack of accurate reporting. The media has invested heavily in making news more visually appealing, but too little has been done to reinforce the need for fact-first journalism.

At its core, journalism is about truth. The fact that we now need fact-checkers as a separate industry shows just how far the media has moved away from its original mission. If we want to rebuild public trust in the news, the solution isn’t more technology or snappier headlines — it’s a return to the basics of good, old-fashioned fact-checking by the reporters themselves. Accuracy isn’t an afterthought; it’s the job.

- -Jaci Clement, [email protected]

This is an abbreviated version of the Fair Media Council's weekly newsletter, The Latest. Get the full newsletter in your inbox by clicking here.