A 'Good Journalism' Manifesto & Plug-in Quality-Icon giving direction

Restoring Trust in the News

“Fake News” has made it into our everyday vocabulary, and fighting it has become the objective of many. But is it really sufficient to target incorrect information, or do we instead need to restore general trust in the media?

Is it important for well informed choices and decisions that we have access to Truth & Insight? Does it affect the functioning of Democracies? Is it important for our Future?

News Out of the Blue

The Internet is a place is where sites spring up daily, providing "news" abundantly. Some are honest and offer high-quality information, others are trying to support their funders' agenda by "creating" or distorting the truth, and some just publish statements to generate advertising revenue. Without guidance, average users have no way to tell if what they are reading is the truth or not.

Together with journalists, media organisations and other experts, we develop a simple manifesto of good practices, covering relevant aspects of factuality, context and completeness. These standards are public and written in a way applicable for most forms of journalism.

The VERIMEDIA manifesto (draft)

Good journalism requires more than just a report of events, particularly when it comes to the political, societal or scientific arena. Without checking and documenting sources, without creating context and putting things into perspective, without critically checking statements and spin, it is impossible for readers, listeners and watchers to use media output to their benefit. These are the elements covered by the verimedia manifesto.

A - Strive for reproducible accuracy

• Name and identify all relevant sources. Exceptions apply where anonymity is required to protect sources (see “Anonymous sources*” below);
• Aim at referencing all sources in a way that enables recipients to identify, and if publicly available, retrieve that source without effort;
• Verify core elements of a piece’s statements with additional sources or – if impossible – check plausibility;
• Separate facts from opinion by identifying both clearly.

B - Provide immediate context for your audience

• Put core statements and data into current and historical context to clarify relevance and importance;
• Explain potential consequences;
• Research and quote contradicting evidence or relevant statements.

Here are a few examples of what the above suggestions could mean:

• Mention name and role of a person in a way that the person is identifiable*;
• When quoting scientific publications, mention organization/author(s), journal and include links;
• When drawing from PR statements or similar sources, clearly identify the nature of the source;
• For news agency sources: fully verify content or mark as “unverified”;
• Quote all data source(s) and provide links;
• Accurately transport the content of the original source, e.g.

1. don’t distort data by suggestively selecting a certain scale or date range;
2. don’t quote out of context.

• Put actions reported on (e.g. scandals, statements, etc.): in context with previous actions of others (e.g. answer to “how normal is this behavior?”)
• For scientific findings or new products, evaluate and discuss relevance, novelty, and contradicting evidence;
• For all content, clarify relevance and possible positive and negative effects for readers;

C - Special cases

*Anonymous sources

Even though it is unavoidable and important to work with anonymous sources in some cases, particularly in investigative journalism, special caution is warranted, by following these rules:

• Identify the nature of the message as in headline/first paragraph (e.g. using “rumor”, “Anonymous Hill source says”)
• Verify status and role of a person using public sources before quoting anonymously;
• Verify facts using other sources or original documents provided by source (including evidence check for tampering);
• Verifying the track record of a source to gauge credibility, and, where possible, include in article;
• Check validity/plausibility of statements with additional, possibly quotable sources;
• Offer an opportunity for comment to key targets affected by the publication, if feasible.

Portraits/Essays/Comments

While there is much more room for creative freedom when writing/producing with more depth, the application of the above principles are still relevant, particularly when it comes to identification and validation of sources and the creation of context that becomes the foundation upon which a picture is drawn.

PLEASE HELP US IMPROVE THE MANIFESTO

The above is still a draft of the manifesto, and it is by no means perfect yet. Please highlight issues, suggest improvements, and send us your comments. The more feedback we receive, the better www.verimedia.org becomes.

Who are we?

The people behind Verimedia have no financial interest or political agenda, and do not work in or for the media. We are citizens with a vital interest in ensuring that the news we receive is trustworthy and helpful in making decisions about the future.

Why are we doing this?

Democracies only function if voters can make well-informed decisions. Once we lose the ability to "know" and "understand", they are ultimately doomed, and votes are bought by the people with the largest budgets who can afford to define their version of "truth."

How can you support Verimedia?

Verimedia is a project entirely built by volunteers who are convinced that democracies need strong and independent journalism accessible to everybody. In the internet age, readers also need guidance on the quality and trustworthiness of their sources. You can use this link to donate using PayPal or any credit card Please help us grow and improve our effort with your contribution.

Currently, your donations are received by the Institute for Integrated Economic Research (IIER), a registered charity with the IRS in the United States (EIN: 27-3932630) and a tax exempt foundation in the Netherlands (Register ID: 857251247). All funds received through this form will be fully allocated to the verimedia project. More information at the are www.verimedia.org website.

Hans van der Loo is Chairman of the Advisory Board of the Institute of Integrated Economic Research (IIER), which is a non-profit research organization focused on developing an unbiased view of global economic processes. IIER tries to re-focus economic research away from individual subsystems, towards a broader understanding of the larger forces driving overall progress or retreat in the human eco-system. The global economic crisis that began in 2008 is a good example of why this is necessary - traditional economic science neither provided the ability to predict the current downturn, nor does it sufficiently explain the mechanisms at work. For more information : www.energyandstuff.org

IIER is an academia-type (and -related) institution, without a political or economic agenda, bound to science rather than opinion. It has built an economic model that works, and is building tools that can be used by society as we speak. It has been right about almost everything in economics during the past 10 years, including resource/energy price dynamics and the rise of extreme parties. It is now starting to launch a more public outreach campaign : www.verimedia.org