A reader’s guide to judging a news story in two minutes
Six quick questions help you tell solid reporting from a weak story, wherever you read it, including here.
The short version
- Six quick questions about source, date, evidence, labelling, numbers and corroboration catch most weak stories.
- Worked examples show how to apply the questions to a real-looking story in practice.
- A short routine before sharing helps keep misleading claims from spreading further.
You do not need special training to judge a news story. A few questions, asked quickly, will catch most problems. They work on a newspaper website, a video clip, a screenshot in a group chat or an article on this site.
The six questions
- Who is reporting it? Can you find the publication’s editorial standards and contact details? Is there a named author?
- When was it published? Old stories often recirculate as if they were new. Check the date, and look for an “updated” note.
- What are the sources? Good reporting names its sources and links to documents, data or research where it can.
- Is it news or opinion? Opinion pieces argue a case. They should be labelled. Neither is bad, but they are different.
- Do the numbers make sense? A percentage without the underlying number, or a chart without labelled axes, deserves a second look.
- What do others say? If a surprising claim appears in only one place, wait before sharing it.
Why each one matters
Who matters because accountability matters. A publication that lists its editors, explains its standards and offers a way to contact it can be held to account when it gets something wrong. An anonymous page with no way to reach anyone cannot. On this site, for example, you can read our Editorial Policy and our Corrections Policy.
When matters because context changes. A story about a price rise, a storm or a protest may have been accurate when it was written and misleading when it resurfaces years later.
Sources matter because they let you check. “Experts say” is weaker than a named expert. A named expert is weaker than a named expert plus a link to the research they are describing.
Labelling matters because argument and reporting do different jobs. It is perfectly reasonable to read opinion, as long as you know that is what you are reading.
Numbers matter because they sound authoritative. A figure that doubles sounds dramatic, but doubling from two cases to four is very different from doubling from two million to four million.
Corroboration matters because genuine news rarely stays in one place for long. If a major event has happened, other reputable outlets will usually be reporting it soon.
Worked examples
Here are three illustrative examples, invented for this guide, to show the questions in use.
A screenshot of a headline in a group chat. There is no link, no date and no visible publication. Before reacting, search for the headline’s key words. If you cannot find the original article on a recognisable site, treat the screenshot as unverified. If you can find it, check the date: it may be several years old.
A story claiming that something “increased risk by 50 per cent”. This is question five. Ask: 50 per cent of what? If the original risk was very small, a 50 per cent rise may still leave it very small. A good article will give you the starting figure. If it does not, that is a reason for caution, not panic.
A strongly worded article about a local planning decision. It is persuasive, but on closer inspection it sits in an opinion section and quotes only one side. That does not make it wrong. It does mean you should look for a news report of the same decision before forming a firm view.
A habit worth building
Before sharing a story, run through a short routine:
- Read past the headline, at least to the end of the first few paragraphs.
- Check the date and look for any update or correction note.
- Open one source link, if there is one, to see whether it says what the article claims.
- Ask yourself whether you could explain it to a friend in two sentences.
It takes a minute and makes the information around all of us a little better. And if you think we have fallen short of these standards ourselves, please tell us.
We check our facts after publication too. If you spot an error, please tell us. Any correction will be noted here, as set out in our corrections policy.
