The Power of Quiet Verification: Changing Society Without 'Condemning Anyone' - AI Book Review of 'What is Fact-Checking'

"Lately, I don't know what to believe"—don't you ever feel that way?

When you open social media, information of unknown authenticity flows in one after another, and before you know it, you find yourself judging things based solely on the atmosphere of "it seems somewhat correct." In this era called post-truth, how do we protect "facts"? One answer to that is "fact-checking".

This time, based on the co-authored book by Yoichiro Tateiwa and Hitofumi Yanai, 'What is Fact-Checking' (Iwanami Booklet), I have summarized what fact-checking is, why it is necessary now, and what each of us can do, while also incorporating the perspective of a certified public psychologist.

The power of quiet verification that changes society without "condemning anyone"

Why fact-checking now?

We are currently in a flood of information.

In an era where anyone can become a publisher with just a smartphone, the downside of that convenience is that unverified information spreads in an instant and begins to affect society. When Mr. Trump was elected in the 2016 US presidential election, the term "post-truth" spread rapidly. Emotions and personal beliefs move public opinion more than objective facts. Such a situation is already becoming the norm.

Against this backdrop, "fact-checking" is attracting attention as a new method of journalism.

The role of "gatekeeper of information" that existing media has played is malfunctioning due to the spread of the internet and social media. Now that information reaches us directly without going through media, there is a social need for a mechanism that makes us pause and ask, "Is that true?"

The "resolve" of the two authors who wrote this book

The author, Mr. Yoichiro Tateiwa, was originally a reporter for the NHK social department. He is a person who experienced being a Tehran correspondent and played a central role in the coverage of the "Panama Papers," which exposed tax evasion by world leaders.

However, Mr. Tateiwa quit NHK.

This is because he felt that "objective verification of truth against power" could not be sufficiently performed within the framework of an organization. After resigning, he has continued his activities as a pioneer of fact-checking in Japan, serving as editor-in-chief of the NPO media 'News no Tane' and as a board member of the FactCheck Initiative (FIJ).

The other author, Mr. Hitofumi Yanai, is a former Sankei Shimbun reporter who later became a lawyer, a person with a unique background. In 2012, he established the Japan Institute for Media Verification and launched the site "GoHoo" to verify media misinformation. In 2017, as the secretary-general of FIJ, he has been focusing on building the foundation for fact-checking in Japan and introducing international principles.

A journalist who was on the front lines of investigative reporting and a legal expert. With these two joining forces, this book is packed with both practical weight and theoretical rigor.

What does it mean to "do" fact-checking?

This is actually a point that is often misunderstood.

Fact-checking is the activity of limiting the scope to "objectively verifiable facts" from among published discourses, verifying their accuracy, and announcing the results.

What is important is that what is being verified is "fact," not "opinion." An opinion like "I am against this policy" is not subject to verification. However, a factual statement like "this policy lowered the unemployment rate" can be confirmed with data. That line-drawing is the crux of fact-checking.

And there is something Mr. Tateiwa says clearly.

This 'restrained stance' is the very source of trust. Regardless of the other party's position, if there is an error, it is corrected. Non-partisanship and neutrality are the lifeblood of fact-checking.

9-Level Rating—It Doesn't End with 'True or False'

The interesting thing about fact-checking is that it doesn't end with just black and white. The rating system recommended by FIJ actually has nine levels.

'Accurate' means there are no factual errors and no important elements are missing. 'Mostly Accurate' means there are some inaccuracies, but the core is correct. 'Misleading' means that while no lies were told, important facts were omitted or clickbait headlines were used to cause misunderstanding. This is a very common pattern in the SNS era, isn't it?

Furthermore, 'Inaccurate' (a mix of accurate and inaccurate parts), 'Unsubstantiated' (extremely scarce evidence), 'False' (there is a factual error in the core part), and 'Fabricated' (a case where there is an error and a strong suspicion that it was conveyed while knowing it was not true).

In addition, there are 'Verdict Pending' (truth cannot be proven at this time) and 'Not Subject to Verification' (matters of opinion or subjectivity that cannot be verified in the first place).

What I feel when looking at these nine levels is that 'information is a gradient.' It's not just black or white; there are many stages in between. By having this rating system, readers are given the material to judge for themselves 'how reliable' something is.

The 'Fact-Check Routine' of South Korea's JTBC is Amazing

This book also introduces overseas examples. Especially impressive is the initiative at JTBC television in South Korea.

At JTBC, a specialized team consisting of lead reporters, producers, researchers, and designers is formed, and they perform fact-checking every day in a cycle like this.

In the morning, they discuss suspicious discourse and select targets for verification. They divide the work and begin the confirmation process. In the afternoon, they thoroughly discuss the verification results within the team and conduct a multi-faceted 'cross-fact-check.' Once the manuscript is written, they compare it against anticipated counterarguments for a final check. Then, they present it with graphics on the evening news.

Through this routine, for example, a net post by an opposition party official claiming that 'South Korea is 50 years behind Japan in IT technology' was immediately judged as 'not a fact' based on objective indicators. Honestly, I felt envious that fact-checking is incorporated into daily news production.

By the way, an organization called 'Mafindo' in Indonesia functions as a truly citizen-participatory platform where 70,000 members using Facebook submit fake information, which is then fact-checked and broadcast via SNS and radio.

Practice in Japan—The Battle Over 'Facts' in Election Campaigns

Specific examples within Japan are also introduced.

In the 2017 House of Representatives general election, a team of scholars and journalists centered around FIJ verified politicians' statements and online discourse in real-time. A method of visualizing politicians' statements using a color-coded graph ranging from 'correct' to 'lies/nonsense' was used, providing voters with easy-to-understand visual material for judgment.

When discourse inciting social anxiety, such as 'immigration policy' or 'tampering with early voting,' was spread, work was done to quickly investigate and debunk the inaccurate information. All sources are clearly stated, and it is designed so that people who have doubts can check for themselves. This can be called a prescription for the distrust of existing media.

Also, the way the expression 'correction' is used in the Liberal Democratic Party's slush fund scandal is being verified. Dismantling the rhetoric of words used by politicians to hide inconvenient facts with objective evidence—this is the true essence of fact-checking as a watchdog of power.

Fact-checking also has 'side effects'

From here on, it's a slightly cautious discussion. Fact-checking is not a panacea.

First, there is the issue of the 'asymmetry of time'. Generating fake news with AI takes an instant, but verifying it takes many times longer. Mr. Tateiwa himself admits that 'it cannot be a means with immediate effect.'

Next, there is the 'backfire effect'. This is a psychologically known phenomenon, but by repeatedly citing misinformation to deny it, you may inadvertently increase its awareness, or in some groups, it may even trigger a backlash, leading to the counterproductive result of people 'believing more firmly in the information they want to believe.'

Adding a perspective as a certified public psychologist, humans have a cognitive bias called 'confirmation bias.' It is the tendency to gather information that is convenient for oneself and ignore information that is inconvenient. When the results of a fact-check contradict one's own beliefs, it is, in a sense, a natural psychological reaction for some people to feel that 'this fact-check itself is biased.' That is precisely why fact-checking must focus on 'presenting materials for judgment' rather than 'imposing' them.

And then, there is the shortage of practitioners in Japan. Fact-checking is a time-consuming and steady task, and the organizations and human resources capable of sustaining it are still limited.

6 Tips for Fact-Checking You Can Start Today

This book summarizes 'information self-defense techniques' that we, as ordinary people, can start practicing today.

① Check the source. Who released that information, and with what intent? Let's start by being skeptical.

② Consult primary sources. Instead of relying on someone else's summary or interpretation, go directly to the original official documents, statistics, or the full text of the statement. This extra step makes a big difference.

③ Distinguish between 'fact' and 'opinion'. Does the text contain objectively verifiable data, or is it the author's value judgment? Just being able to distinguish this changes how you receive information.

④ Compare across multiple media. By not relying on a single source and checking from multiple angles, you can prevent bias and misidentification.

⑤ Check the date of publication. Old information from the past is sometimes recycled as if it were a current event. Checking the date is simple but important.

⑥ Be aware of your own biases. Becoming conscious of the psychological tendency to 'believe the information you want to believe.' I think this is the key to improving literacy.

The Concept of an 'Information Vaccine'

There is a quote from Mr. Yanai that left a particularly strong impression on me in this book.

I liked this perspective of viewing fact-checking as an 'information vaccine.' Vaccines don't kill the pathogen itself, right? They boost the body's immunity so that you can deal with it yourself. Fact-checking is the same; instead of imposing 'this is the correct answer,' it provides the materials for judgment, fostering the ability for each of us to select and discard information.

Fact-Checking as Civic Education

Mr. Tateiwa positions fact-checking not merely as a 'tool for eradicating misinformation,' but as a form of 'civic education.'

It seems that university students are actually participating as fact-checkers, and verification methods are being introduced in classes for high school students. By expanding this to younger generations in the future, the aim is to attempt to change society from the ground up.

By having many citizens experience fact-checking and understand its process, we can create a 'society with a deterrent effect' where fake news does not spread naturally. This is the ideal form.

Fact-checking judgments are not absolute; they play a role in 'adding' to the countless pieces of information available. Simply knowing of their existence encourages us to take a more cautious stance toward information.

Finally—'You, Too, Can Be a Fact-Checker'

One of the book's main messages contains these words:

And, the author's passionate call—'You, too, can be a fact-checker'.

Not only professional journalists, but we ordinary citizens are also carriers and disseminators of information. The spread of fake news can only be prevented if the recipients of information act proactively.

The method of fact-checking may be steady, sometimes accompanied by side effects, and lacking in immediate results. However, in a society where emotional discourse flies about, the work of calmly clarifying truth based on objective evidence is, I believe, the 'last bastion' for us to maintain our reason.

Non-partisanship, transparency, reproducibility, and humble self-regulation. These principles presented in this book should serve as a compass for surviving the information society of the future.

Start today by pausing just once when you see information on social media that concerns you and asking, 'Is that true?' That small step might be the first step toward a society not divided by lies.

#FactChecking #FakeNewsCountermeasures #InformationLiteracy #PostTruth #YouTooCanBeAFactChecker