Fact-checking under deadline: how we support newsrooms

Investigations often reach their final stage under pressure. A publication date is set, the subjects have been approached for comment, and the text is still changing. This is when errors are most likely to slip through and most costly if they do. An independent check of the factual claims in a piece can help, provided it is organised so that it adds rigour with as little disruption as possible to the newsroom's schedule and without blurring who is responsible for the story.

Agreeing the scope

The first conversation is with the editor. Under deadline it is rarely possible to check every sentence to the same depth, so the scope needs to be explicit. Some newsrooms want every factual claim checked. Others want the work focused on claims about named people and organisations, on figures, or on the passages most likely to be challenged.

The standard also needs agreement. A claim might be checked against a primary document, against two independent sources, or against the reporter's own notes and recordings. Each is a legitimate standard for some purposes. Agreeing it in advance means the editor knows what a "checked" mark represents when the log comes back.

Working claim by claim

We break the draft into individual claims and record each one in a log. For every claim within scope, the log shows the source relied on, where it can be found, and whether it supports the claim as written. The newsroom receives the log alongside any comments on the text, so that the reporter and editor can see exactly what was checked and on what basis.

Some claims will not hold up as written. A document may support a narrower statement than the draft makes, or a date may be approximate where the text is precise. In those cases we flag the claim and suggest wording that matches the evidence. Suggested wording is offered as a proposal. The reporter and editor decide whether to adopt it, look for further support or remove the claim.

Every checked claim should come back with a source that the editor can find and test.

Where a claim rests on material we cannot see, such as a confidential source or a document the newsroom is unable to share, we record that and leave the claim unmarked. The newsroom may have good grounds for it, and the log should be clear about what the check did and did not cover.

Keeping roles separate

Factual accuracy and legal risk overlap, and they remain different questions. A statement can be accurate and still carry legal risk, and the assessment of defamation, privacy or contempt issues is a matter for the newsroom's lawyers. Our work is factual checking. Where a point appears to raise a legal question, we draw the editor's attention to it and leave the analysis to counsel.

Editorial independence stays with the newsroom. We do not decide what is newsworthy, how a story is framed or whether it runs. The piece remains the newsroom's work throughout. We do not publish, and we do not share or offer the material elsewhere. Our role ends when the check is complete.

Confidentiality and contact with subjects

Draft investigations are sensitive. They may contain allegations not yet put to their subjects, the identities of sources and material obtained in confidence. We handle drafts on a need-to-know basis within the firm, store them securely, and return or delete working material at the end of the engagement as agreed with the newsroom. Where personal data is involved, we handle it in line with applicable data protection law.

We do not contact the subjects of an investigation, or anyone connected to them, without the editor's prior agreement. Approaches to subjects are part of the newsroom's editorial and legal process, and an unplanned contact can disrupt a right of reply or alert a subject before the newsroom is ready. Where checking a claim would require such contact, we raise it with the editor and agree the approach first.

Our aim in pre-publication work is to give editors a clear record of what has been checked, against what, and with what result. That record is useful on the day of publication and afterwards, if the piece is challenged. The journalism, and every decision about it, remains the newsroom's own.