Why evidence is a required field

On most platforms, a claim and a citation look the same. Here, an argument does not publish without a source, and the source is displayed with the argument so that anyone can check it in one click. That single rule changes the character of a debate: it does not stop people arguing, but it stops them arguing from nothing.

The evidence hierarchy

When a moderator checks an argument, sources are weighed in this order:

  1. Primary official records — ordinances, adopted budgets, staff reports, meeting minutes, court filings and decisions, audited financial statements, official datasets.
  2. Government statistics and regulator data — Census Bureau, Bureau of Labor Statistics, state agencies, transit and utility performance reports.
  3. Peer-reviewed research and systematic reviews — with attention to whether the finding generalizes to the jurisdiction being discussed.
  4. Reports from established research organizations — with their funding and methodology considered.
  5. Reporting by professional news organizations — useful for events and quotes; we prefer the underlying document where one exists.
  6. Advocacy and industry material — accepted as a source for a position, not for a contested fact, and always labeled.

A source that is behind a paywall is acceptable if the argument summarizes the relevant finding accurately.

What the labels mean

  • Verified — a moderator has read the cited source and confirmed it supports the specific claim made, and the source sits in tier 1–3 above. Verified is about the factual premise only. It is not an endorsement of the argument’s conclusion, and both sides of a debate routinely carry Verified arguments.
  • Sourced — a relevant source is cited, but it is secondary, dated, or the claim adds interpretation the source does not itself make.
  • Disputed — the check found that the source does not support the claim, that the figure is materially out of date, or that stronger evidence contradicts it. The label carries the reviewer’s one-paragraph note. Disputed arguments are not deleted unless they also break the community guidelines — the record of what was claimed, and what was wrong with it, is part of the point.

Requesting a check

Any reader — account or not — can press Request Fact Check on an argument. You will be asked for one thing: what specifically is wrong. Requests that say only “this is false” are closed without action; requests that name the claim and, ideally, a contrary source are prioritized.

What happens next:

  1. The request enters the moderation queue and the argument shows a Check requested marker.
  2. A moderator reads the cited source against the claim, and looks for better evidence in both directions.
  3. The outcome — label changed, label kept, argument edited by its author, or referred to a subject reviewer — is published on the argument with a date.
  4. The author of the argument and the person who requested the check are notified.

Typical turnaround is two business days; checks that need a records request or a subject reviewer take longer and say so.

Corrections in our own writing

Our editorial content follows the same standard as user arguments, and a stricter one for our own mistakes. Substantive errors are corrected on the page with a dated correction note at the foot of the article. Trivial fixes — a typo, a broken link — are made silently. Articles that have been substantially updated carry an updated date. See the editorial policy for the full procedure.

Open data

Where a jurisdiction publishes open data, we link the dataset rather than a description of it, and we prefer machine-readable formats. Federal, state and municipal open-data portals — including Data.gov, state portals and city open-data sites — are the first place we look for budget, permit, crash and service-request figures. When a city publishes only a PDF, we say so: it is itself a finding about transparency.

What we do not do

  • We do not rate the truthfulness of people, only of specific claims.
  • We do not check predictions, values or preferences — see the FAQ below.
  • We do not use fact-checking as a way to remove views we disagree with. A well-sourced argument stays up regardless of which side it favors.
  • We do not accept payment, sponsorship or partnership in exchange for any verification outcome. Sponsorship never touches the moderation queue.