False and misleading claims can spread rapidly, making it difficult to separate fact from fiction. To combat this, DW Fact Check offers transparent, evidence‑based verification of such content.
Independent verification is essential when misinformation can outpace the truth.
DW Fact Check introduces its approach to addressing this challenge.
How DW’s fact-checking team works
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
What topics we choose
DW’s fact‑checking team examines a broad spectrum of claims, including statements from politicians, government officials, political parties, celebrities, athletes, business leaders, and non‑profit organizations.
Verification involves assessing the authenticity of images, videos, and audio that go viral on major social‑media platforms.
Increasingly, the team also determines whether widely shared content is genuine or has been created or manipulated with artificial intelligence.
Selection of topics is guided by four criteria: virality, reach, relevance, and impact.
How we verify information
DW Fact Check investigates the origin of a claim, identifies when and where it emerged, determines whether it has been manipulated, and uncovers the parties responsible.
When possible, claims are traced back to their original source and evaluated against reliable data, documents, and expert assessments to establish accuracy.
Our verification process relies on a variety of open‑source intelligence (OSINT) tools and techniques.
The dedicated website offers insight into the workflows and tools we employ, covering methods for verifying images, videos, audio recordings, sources, and textual claims.
Transparency is integral: each fact check provides hyperlinks to all sources used, enabling readers to review the same evidence considered by our journalists.
All DW fact checks are grounded in information verified through reliable, independent sources.
Where feasible, we apply the two‑source principle, seeking confirmation from multiple independent sources.
Interview partners are selected for reliability and impartiality; all interviews are recorded with consent and archived.
Sources are identified by name and occupation, and contact information is provided whenever possible to ensure transparency.
Anonymity is granted only in exceptional cases where a source’s safety is at risk or the subject is sensitive, and such decisions are explained.
How we rate claims
DW employs a collaborative evaluation process to assess claims and determine appropriate verdicts.
Before publication, the lead reporter proposes a verdict to two editors for review.
The rating system includes eight categories: True, False, Misleading, Unproven, Fake, Real, AI‑generated, and AI‑manipulated.
How we use artificial intelligence
DW maintains clear editorial guidelines for the use of artificial intelligence in journalism.
AI can enhance workflows, accessibility, translation, data analysis, and content formatting, but human judgment remains final for all published material.
DW’s ten AI editorial guidelines are available for review.
Every verified piece of content that involves AI is explicitly labeled as AI‑generated or AI‑manipulated.
Verification workflows may incorporate AI detectors to assess whether material was created or altered by AI, though these tools are used cautiously due to frequent inaccuracies.
Multiple detectors are employed to minimize error, and any AI‑related findings are reviewed by journalists alongside additional evidence before conclusions are drawn.
Verified content confirming authenticity is also highlighted, as seen in the example of a viral Gaza destruction video that was confirmed genuine.
How we correct mistakes
DW does not alter broadcast images or videos; any text corrections, blurring, or zooming are clearly indicated with explanations.
We are committed to delivering accurate, high‑quality content and strive to rectify any errors promptly.
When an error is identified, it is corrected as soon as verification is completed, and the revised item is republished across online platforms and social media.
A note appended to the article (or social‑media thread) explains the change and its rationale.
This applies to corrections of numbers, dates, names, locations, quotes, and photographs.
Further details on DW’s error‑handling policies can be found here.
How we work with other fact‑checking organizations
The International Fact‑Checking Network (IFCN) unites over one hundred fact‑checking entities worldwide.
DW Fact Check became a member in March 2024, a status that requires annual confirmation through an application process.
Membership demands proof of credibility based on 31 defined criteria and adherence to the IFCN Code of Principles, which emphasizes non‑partisanship and transparent corrections.
Complaints regarding potential violations of the Code can be submitted to the IFCN.
DW also participates in the ARD Fact‑Check Network, pooling expertise from German public broadcasters.
Impartiality rules at DW
DW is committed to impartiality, striving to include diverse voices and viewpoints, especially on contentious topics.
While staff possess personal experiences and opinions, these remain private and do not influence coverage.
Coverage adheres to the “Basic principles of the programs” defined in §5 of the Deutsche Welle Act.
Our fact checks rely on in‑depth research, OSINT tools, independent sources, transparency, detailed argumentation, clear verdicts, and DW’s standards of unbiased journalism.
How you can reach the team
DW encourages readers and viewers to submit potential claims or questions they encounter.
All submissions are reviewed according to editorial criteria, available resources, and the ability to verify the claim.
You may contact us at factchecking@dw.com with inquiries or concerns.
This article was first published in 2023 and has been updated to reflect new developments and trends. Rachel Baig contributed to the original report. Edited by Josh Axelrod.
