Fact Checking Policies

At FoodFacts.org, we are dedicated to helping consumers make informed decisions by delivering clear, accurate, and reliable information on health and nutrition. Through rigorous and transparent fact-checking, we aim to address misinformation and provide clarity on widely circulated claims. Below, we outline how we select claims to fact-check, our rating system, and our review process to ensure to accuracy and transparency.

How We Select Claims to Fact-Check

We prioritise health and nutrition claims that have gained significant online engagement. Claims that have been widely shared, liked, or commented on—particularly when readers express confusion or ask for clarity in their comments—are likely candidates for our team’s review. We also plan to examine claims reported directly by our users through the website.

Our approach covers a diverse range of topics, ensuring that our fact-checking efforts remain broad and inclusive. This helps us maintain a balanced approach that serves consumers with varied dietary preferences and interests.

How We Rate Our Fact-Checks

To provide clear insights into each claim, we use a dual rating system designed to convey both factual accuracy and overall credibility. Here’s how it works:

Our Classification System

We categorise individual claims using straightforward symbols to indicate their level of accuracy, similar to systems used by other respected fact-checking sites:

• 🟢 True: The claim is factually accurate
• 🟡 Mostly True: The claim is largely accurate but contains some inaccuracies.
• 🟠 Misleading: The claim, while not entirely incorrect, may give an impression that could lead to misunderstandings.
• 🔴 Mostly False: The claim has some elements of truth but is primarily inaccurate.
• 🔴 False: The claim is incorrect.

This classification system helps readers quickly understand the accuracy of a claim and its place within the broader health and nutrition information landscape.

Star Rating System

In addition to our classification symbols, we use a star rating system to evaluate full articles, providing a more comprehensive view of media sources. This system is aimed at supporting media literacy by highlighting the overall balance of content. Ratings range from 1 to 5 stars, with more stars indicating more problematic content. Ratings are calculated based on a Decision Matrix framework and are based on four main criteria:

1. Misleading Potential – Does the overall impression of this media piece, including the headline, article content, and any additional links, create a clear and accurate understanding for the consumer?
2. Balance – Does the article offer fair representation of multiple perspectives?
3. Factuality - What sources and evidence are used to defend the author’s position, or to answer the question at stake?
4. Clarity – Is the way the information is presented conducive to confusion?

Our star rating system gives users additional insight into the credibility of a source, helping them navigate complex health and nutrition information with confidence.

How We Fact-Check

Our fact-checking process is thorough and built on principles of integrity and transparency. Each claim undergoes a multi-step review process:

1. Source Verification and Claimant Engagement: We examine any sources cited by the claimant, assessing their relevance and reliability. Additionally, we always reach out to the claimant to offer them an opportunity to comment or clarify their statement, and to provide sources if none are presented in the post.
2. Cross-Referencing: We assess each claim within the wider context of nutritional research, checking how it aligns or contrasts with other findings. This includes reviewing related studies to evaluate their scope and relevance, and considering how closely the claim on social media reflects the actual findings of the research.
3. Team Consensus and Expert Review: One fact-checker drafts the fact-check, which is then reviewed by a second fact-checker to ensure a consistent rating. Each fact-check on nutritional or medical claims is further reviewed by experts from a variety of fields. This step is essential for ensuring accuracy, offering comprehensive context, and minimising any potential bias.
4. Transparency and Source Citation: We are committed to full transparency, providing direct links to all research sources and calculations. We prioritise primary sources of information—such as peer-reviewed journal articles, official reports, and primary data—over secondary sources to give our readers access to the most reliable information.

At FoodFacts.org, we understand the impact that health and nutrition misinformation can have on individual and public well-being. Our goal is to provide consumers with the full picture, offering facts and context without prescribing specific choices. We encourage our community to explore our fact-checks, report claims they come across, and join us in the fight against nutrition misinformation.

Contest a Rating

If you wish to contest the rating of a piece of evaluated media, please contact us.

‍