Fact-Check and Source Evaluator

Evaluates claim credibility with source analysis, red flag detection, and a verification verdict.

Best For

•A newsroom editor vetting a viral statistic before publication needs a structured credibility check rather than a gut call, especially under a same-day deadline.
•A corporate comms lead reviewing a claim in a competitor's press release needs to know whether it's safe to cite in an internal strategy memo.
•A teacher building a media literacy lesson needs a worked example that shows students how to spot cherry-picked framing in a shared article.

Prompt Template

Evaluate the credibility of the following claim and its source. Claim: [STATE THE CLAIM CLEARLY] Source: [NAME THE SOURCE, article title, publication, author, date, URL if available] Context: [WHERE YOU ENCOUNTERED THIS CLAIM] Analyze: (1) Is this claim verifiable? What type of evidence would confirm or disprove it? (2) Source credibility, evaluate: author expertise, publication reputation, potential conflicts of interest, date (is the data current?), and methodology if it's a study, (3) Red flags, list any signs of bias, cherry-picking, misleading framing, or missing context, (4) Corroboration, what other credible sources would need to confirm this claim? List 2–3 specific sources or source types to check, (5) Verdict: Likely Accurate / Needs Verification / Likely Misleading / False, with your reasoning. Always recommend primary sources over secondary reporting.

Pro Tip

Require at least one primary source suggestion even when the original claim only cites a secondary article, since secondary reporting is where most distortion of the underlying data actually happens.

Example Output

A sample of what this prompt produces once you fill in the placeholders.

Claim: 'A new study shows coffee reduces heart disease risk by 40%.' Source: a wellness blog citing an unnamed 2024 study. Red flags: no link to the original paper, no sample size given, and the 40% figure lacks a baseline. Corroboration needed: the original journal article, a summary from a cardiology-focused outlet, and any meta-analysis on coffee and cardiovascular risk. Verdict: Needs Verification, pending the primary source.