Fact check: How does Factually select its news sources?

1. Summary of the results

The original statement inquires about how Factually selects its news sources. However, upon reviewing the analyses provided, it becomes clear that none of the sources explicitly state how Factually selects its news sources ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]}. The analyses primarily focus on evaluating information sources, identifying fake news, and spotting bias, which could be useful in selecting reliable news sources ^{[1] [2] [4] [5]}. Some sources provide lists of fact-checking websites and tools, such as PolitiFact, FactCheck.org, and Snopes ^[4], as well as reliable news sources like Access World News, Nexis Uni, and Global Newsstream ^[6]. Additionally, there are discussions on the importance of source diversity in news stories, particularly in stories about science and research ^[7], and the relationship between viewpoint diversity in news content and audiences' perceptions of diversity and credibility ^[8]. A survey of journalists also highlights the need for greater diversity in newsrooms, with many journalists giving their news organizations mixed grades on diversity ^[9].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

A key missing context in the original statement is the lack of explicit information on Factually's news source selection process ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]}. Alternative viewpoints that could be considered include the importance of source diversity, viewpoint diversity, and the need for greater diversity in newsrooms ^{[7] [8] [9]}. For instance, source diversity can lead to new perspectives and approaches to problems ^[7], while viewpoint diversity can influence audiences' perceptions of credibility ^[8]. Furthermore, journalists' views on diversity in the news industry ^[9] could provide valuable insights into the selection of news sources. Other alternative viewpoints could include the role of fact-checking websites and tools, as well as the evaluation of news sources, in selecting reliable news sources ^{[4] [5]}.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement may be misleading or incomplete as it implies that Factually's news source selection process is explicitly stated, when in fact, none of the sources provide this information ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]}. This could be due to a lack of transparency on the part of Factually or insufficient research on the topic. Additionally, the statement may be biased towards a particular viewpoint , such as emphasizing the importance of fact-checking or source diversity, without considering other factors that may influence the selection of news sources ^{[7] [8] [9]}. The sources that benefit from this framing are those that emphasize the importance of evaluating information sources, identifying fake news, and spotting bias, such as fact-checking websites and tools ^{[4] [5]}, as well as news organizations that prioritize diversity and inclusion ^[9].