Skip to content

Search for:

About
PERITIA Outputs
Trust Hub
Trustworthiness Toolkit
Highlights
Partners
Contact Us

About
PERITIA Research
Youth on Trust Essay Collection
Trust Hub
Trustworthiness Toolkit
Project Highlights
Events
PERITIA Newsletter
Partners
Team
Contact Us

Search for:

Are you using reliable sources of information when you decide whom to trust?

Read full article

Do you consider this opinion piece a reliable source of information?

Other examples

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 870883. The information and opinions on this website and other communications materials are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Commission.

© 2023 PERITIA | Privacy Policy | Legal notice | Powered by Scienseed

Sorry, that wasn’t the right answer

In this example, the author uses exaggerated and inflammatory words such as “extremists” to talk about an opposing viewpoint. Even opinion pieces should try to be objective and fair-minded.

Do you want to know more?

Here are some questions and a few tips about reliable sources of information:

What is the scientific consensus on the topic that’s being reported on? ¹ Is the outlet clear about that consensus? Or are they reporting fringe opinions
Are there signs of conspiratorial thinking? ² Indicators of conspiratorial thinking include the use of dog whistle terms, symbols and emblems of conspiracy groups, or offering elaborate explanations of events that have not been accepted by established scientists.
Does the source clearly distinguish between factual reporting and editorial opinion?
Reliable sources correct themselves. Does your source do that? News sources that do not offer corrections do not care about the accuracy of the information they provide and should not be trusted.
Does the source rely on click-bait headlines or unattributed sources? ³ Reliable sources engage with criticism of their stories without being defensive. They are willing to assess counterevidence that contradict their stories.
Does the source operate under reliable oversight? ⁴ Someone other than the author of the article should also be responsible for checking the accuracy of the story and the evidence drawn to support it.
Remember that you can fact-check your sources of information. ⁵

Additional Resources

Veri fying c limate claims digital course
Debun k ing Handbook 2020
Bad News game
The Google Int erland game
Health feedback fact checking site

Well done – you were right!

In this example, the author uses exaggerated and inflammatory words such as “extremists” to talk about an opposing viewpoint. Even opinion pieces should try to be objective and fair-minded.

Do you want to know more?

Here are some questions and a few tips about reliable sources of information:

What is the scientific consensus on the topic that’s being reported on? ¹ Is the outlet clear about that consensus? Or are they reporting fringe opinions
Are there signs of conspiratorial thinking? ² Indicators of conspiratorial thinking include the use of dog whistle terms, symbols and emblems of conspiracy groups, or offering elaborate explanations of events that have not been accepted by established scientists.
Does the source clearly distinguish between factual reporting and editorial opinion?
Reliable sources correct themselves. Does your source do that? News sources that do not offer corrections do not care about the accuracy of the information they provide and should not be trusted.
Does the source rely on click-bait headlines or unattributed sources? ³ Reliable sources engage with criticism of their stories without being defensive. They are willing to assess counterevidence that contradict their stories.
Does the source operate under reliable oversight? ⁴ Someone other than the author of the article should also be responsible for checking the accuracy of the story and the evidence drawn to support it.
Remember that you can fact-check your sources of information. ⁵

Additional Resources

Verifying c lim ate claims digital course
Debunking Han dbook 2020
B ad N ews game
Th e Go ogle Interland game
Health fe edback fact checking site

We are using cookies to give you the best experience on our website.

You can find out more about which cookies we are using or switch them off in .

Powered by GDPR Cookie Compliance

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

Enable or Disable Cookies Enabled Disabled

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.