Fact check: Does factually.co use AI to "fact check"?

1. Summary of the results

The original statement inquires about the use of AI by factually.co for fact-checking purposes. However, none of the provided sources directly mention factually.co or its use of AI for fact-checking ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Other sources discuss the general use of AI in fact-checking, with some highlighting its potential, such as the study on Originality.ai's Fact Checking Aid which showed a high accuracy rate of 72.3% ^[4]. Additionally, an analysis found that five AI models consistently denied certain claims made by President Trump, showcasing AI's potential in fact-checking ^[3]. On the other hand, concerns about the reliability of AI chatbots in fact-checking have been raised, citing examples of mistakes and misinformation ^[5].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

• The original statement lacks specific context about factually.co, such as its mission, methods, or any statements it has made about using AI for fact-checking.
• Alternative viewpoints on AI fact-checking are presented, ranging from its potential benefits ^{[4] [3]} to concerns about its reliability ^[5], but none directly address factually.co.
• The effectiveness and limitations of AI in fact-checking are discussed across various sources, but a direct link to factually.co's practices is missing ^{[4] [3] [5]}.
• The importance of verifying AI-generated information is emphasized, suggesting that while AI can be a tool in fact-checking, it should not be solely relied upon ^{[3] [5]}.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement may imply that factually.co uses AI for fact-checking without providing evidence, which could lead to misinformation if not clarified ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

• Those who benefit from the implication that factually.co uses AI could include proponents of AI in fact-checking looking to promote its use, or factually.co itself if it seeks to appear at the forefront of technological advancements in fact-checking.
• Conversely, those who benefit from skepticism towards AI fact-checking might include critics of AI reliability or proponents of traditional fact-checking methods, who could use the lack of direct evidence about factually.co's methods to argue against the adoption of AI in fact-checking ^[5].
• The absence of direct information about factually.co's use of AI leaves room for speculation and potential misinformation, highlighting the need for clear, direct statements from factually.co or thorough investigations into its practices ^{[1] [2] [3]}.