Everyone hates the referee : how fact-checkers mitigate a public perception of bias

Abstract

Eight journalists from leading fact-checking organizations discussed how they grapple with accusations of bias. In interviews they said they take those accusations seriously, but they haven't quite figured out the best way to respond. The approaches they each take to fact-checking vary only slightly; the most significant difference is in whether they use rating systems. Furthermore, their communications with frustrated readers tend to be more reflective of the political climate than of the news organization. Attempts by journalists to change the minds of readers who believe fact-checking organizations and reporters who write fact-checks are biased only has a limited effect, if any effect at all.