We are a nonpartisan organization dedicated to advancing truth in the Cameroonian media and public discourse. The organisation is nonpartisan to avoid biases. We fact check by abiding by the core values of truth, impartiality, and transparency.
How this shapes our work
1. Verify the most recent, trustworthy facts
The allegation is then put to the test against the most recent and trustworthy available information. Surveys, censuses, and research projects might be examples of this. We analyze this data to identify any flaws and crucial context that readers should be aware of.
2. Post and track comments
Finally, we release the report and keep an eye on the response. If a reader finds a mistake, we openly amend the report.
3. Finish the report
We prepare a report. This involves laying forth the specifics of the claim as well as the circumstances surrounding its delivery and reporting. The evidence that either supports or refutes the assertion is next explained. The report is summarized in the conclusion, which also explains the decision we made. For those who would prefer to read the report in its entirety at once, we also provide a summary before giving the content. We cite the source or give a link for every piece of evidence we offer.
4. Request proof
We try to get in touch with the individual who submitted the claim in order to request the supporting documentation. As a result, they have the chance to back up their claim.
5. Effect
If a claim is proven to be untrue, unsupported, or deceptive, we get in touch with the claimant. We provide our arguments and want a public retraction.
6. Verify what was stated
We determine what was spoken with precision. Sometimes readers give us ambiguous claims for us to verify. But we need the exact phrase in order to verify a claim. What did they actually say? Was it accurate? What was the statement’s context, if any?
7. Ask a co-worker to look through the report and conclusions
One of the researcher’s colleagues will analyze the report and impartially evaluate the results to make sure it is correct.
8. Consult professionals about the evidence
After obtaining the relevant evidence and background information, we consult with subject-matter experts. They can give analysis and aid in understanding the data. We do not employ anonymous sources and only use professionals who are prepared to speak on the record.
9. Choose the assertion to examine
Our staff keep an eye on inputs from readers and publicly available remarks. Then, we evaluate the assertion to see whether fact-checking is necessary. Is the subject significant? Is the remark made in the claim a statement of truth or an opinion? Is the claim relevant? Have we already concentrated on this speaker? In each argument, we make care to examine all sides.
Corrections policy
Please let us know if you see any errors or omissions, or if there is anything we can do to make an article clearer. We appreciate any feedback that enables us to do our work better.
- Send any comments, corrections, or grievances to email.
By being as specific as you can in your comments, you can help us understand your problems. Please provide any links to sources of information or data that are available to the general public.
- Process
Comments can be left in an article’s comment area or by email. We often examine these channels. A senior staff member will evaluate each and every comment and piece of feedback.
If we plan to update our article as a result of your feedback or remark, we’ll let you know as soon as we’ve given it some thought. The article will make note of any changes if we do decide to make them.
If a factual inaccuracy is discovered, a “CORRECTION” comment will be added to the report along with a description of the changes that were made.
If there are any changes or clarifications, a note will be added with the word “UPDATE” and a description of what has changed.
Code of principles
Wide-ranging discussions between Cameroon Check and other non-partisan fact-checkers from around the world led to the creation of this code of ethics.
A dedication to methodology transparency and standards
The mechanism behind how Cameroon Check chooses, researches, writes, edits, publishes, and updates its fact-checks is described. We invite our readers to submit allegations for us to verify, and we are open about why and how we do so.
A dedication to an honest and open corrections system
Cameroon Check makes our corrections policy public and adheres to it strictly. We make mistakes in an open and straightforward manner in accordance with the corrections policy, making every effort to ensure that readers see the updated version.
A dedication to financing and organizational openness
Regarding our financial sources, Cameroon Check is open and honest. If we take funds from other organizations, we make sure that the findings we arrive at in our reports are independent of any funding sources. Cameroon Check highlights the organizational structure and legal status as well as the professional backgrounds of all major members of the organization. We make it very clear how readers may get in touch with us.
A dedication to impartiality and justice
Every claim that is fact-checked by Cameroon Check is subject to the same standards. We don’t focus our fact-checking on any one party. Every fact-check follows the same procedure, and the conclusions are determined by the evidence. Cameroon Check does not endorse any causes or take a stance on any topics.
A dedication to standards and source transparency
Cameroon Check wants its readers to be able to independently confirm its findings. Except in situations when a source’s personal safety would be jeopardized, we disclose enough information about every source so that readers can repeat our work. In these situations, we offer as much information as we can.
Five key principles
1. We grade factual claims
Ideas, ideologies, and arguments are not rated for accuracy by Cameroon Check. We assign a grade to assertions that people make and portray as facts. We pay close attention to the particular language they employ as well as the statement’s context.
2. The speaker bears the burden of proof
People who assert things as facts have to be prepared and equipped to back them up with proof. Even though Cameroon Check will make an effort to confirm the facts, this won’t always be feasible. We rank a claim as unproven if the facts cannot be independently confirmed.
3. An emphasis on what matters
We do not aim to find minute discrepancies while rating the correctness of assertions. Precision is crucial, but unless it is absolutely necessary, we are not interested in figures with three decimal places.
4. At the time, the strongest publicly accessible evidence
Worldwide, almost all data is really an approximation. Data quality differs throughout Africa, not just from nation to country but also from topic to subject. We use the greatest publicly available evidence at the time the claim was made to grade it. This includes on-the-record interviews as well as facts and statistics with clear sources. Off-the-record briefings or inaccessible evidence are not used by us.
5. Errors and updating when new or more convincing evidence is discovered
We invest a lot of effort to ensure that our study results are accurate and consistent with the most recent data. Please let us know if there is anything we missed, a mistake we made, or new or better proof emerges concerning the reported facts. We will then examine the report. If the report has to be updated or corrected, we will do so and let readers know about it.
Fact-checking tips
It is not feasible nor desirable for one organization to set itself up to fact-check every claim made in a nation with hundreds of media outlets, hundreds of rival organizations, and several hundred million citizens.
We looked at the facts supporting some of the significant public assertions. Our overarching objective is to get people to independently verify public assertions because we cannot accomplish everything.
How to fact check comic
Since most people lead busy lives, it is frequently simpler for a journalist, researcher, government employee, or entrepreneur to accept a claim made in public at face value. Unfortunately, this makes it possible for the public and other figures to intentionally or unintentionally mislead us all with no repercussions.
However, it’s crucial to resist cynicism while battling false information. Yes, some politicians, media outlets, companies, and others intentionally try to mislead their audiences, but it doesn’t imply they all do. And just because a famous figure lies once doesn’t mean they lie all the time.
Instead of cynicism, we want to foster open-minded skepticism. The wisest course of action, whether you’re a judge or a journalist, a businesswoman or a healthcare professional, is to challenge rather than discount a claim until there is solid, verifiable evidence to support it.
What to ask
In addition to the assistance and counsel of subject-matter experts across a number of disciplines, we draw on our own expertise as researchers and journalists to compile our reports.
The same methodology was utilized to provide some pointers and suggestions for fact-checking, beginning with the most important inquiries.
- Where is the evidence?
- Is the evidence verifiable?
- Is the evidence sound?
How was the information gathered? When? By whom? What biases should the journalist, judge or businesswoman look out for in how the information is collected and reported?