Claim: One article can represent multiple fact checking needs

Question

Wondering how one fact checks articles when there are multiple claims or ambiguous situations:

Examples:

1) When the headline for an article is true, but what it reports is false. example - when the headline is something like "Smith says moon is square." The headline is true because Smith actually said it, but what Smith says is false.

2) When the headline on a main page is sensationalist/false for clickbait purposes, but the article it links to is true. How do you fact check just the headline on the main page, without the underlying article?

Food for thought

Answer 1

An easy way to fact check information in an article is look up if the source is credible. Even if what the headline says is true does not make the information correct. Some websites are not verifying all information is correct before putting it out because it draws attention. A headline such as "Smith says moon is square" will draw more attention than a normal headline. Headlines are meant to grab a readers attention if it is dull of course people are not going to click it. Without even going to the article a reader can just do a quick search to see is the moon square before wasting their time on the article. Even if the headline is true because Smith did say the moon was square does not make it a reliable source. Readers would have to verify who Smith is and if he is even credible before pushing forward. If the article is done well who Smith is would be close to the top of the article. 

Answer 2

Fact checks should definitely always have another article or two to cite, apart from the linked one. The more articles that are cited, the more reliable a source is. Think about it this way, if you only have two people working on a project the project is probably going to take longer to get finished and it won't be as detailed as if ten people were working on it. With ten different perspectives, you know that the project or research paper is more diverse in views and knowledge. The same goes for fact checks, the more reliable sites are found with the same information, then it's more understandable for the claim to be verified. If someone claimed that two bodies were burned in the Marseille building, having all of these linked sources would definitely confirm it. They are reliable, known sources, and there are so many that talk about the same thing.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/09/europe/marseilles-france-building-collapse-intl/index.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-65225984

https://www.devdiscourse.com/article/international/2411026-france-rescuers-find-two-bodies-in-rubble-after-building-collapses-in-marseille

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/04/09/marseille-building-collapse-ten-trapped-rubble-france/