Reflecting party agendas, challenging claims: An analysis of editorial judgements and fact-checking journalism during the 2019 UK general election campaign

Soo, Nikki ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8717-4323, Morani, Marina ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7599-843X, Kyriakidou, Maria ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4053-5961 and Cushion, Stephen ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7164-8283 2023. Reflecting party agendas, challenging claims: An analysis of editorial judgements and fact-checking journalism during the 2019 UK general election campaign. Journalism Studies 24 (4) , pp. 460-478. 10.1080/1461670X.2023.2169190

Preview

PDF - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

To counter mis/disinformation, fact-checking organisations are used as sources by journalists to challenge false or misleading statements, especially during election campaigns. But how different fact-checkers editorially construct their analysis and question dubious claims remains under-researched. Drawing on a case study of reporting during the UK’s 2019 General Election campaign, we interviewed senior editors and journalists, and conducted a systematic content analysis of 238 fact-checking stories produced by BBC’s Reality and Channel 4’s Full Fact, along with a fact-checking organisation, Full Fact, in order to critically assess their editorial judgements about the selection of news and use of sources. Our study revealed that fact-checking services at the BBC and Channel 4 were not closely integrated into their routine news production, and that the independent fact-checker, Full Fact, questioned claims differently to broadcasters. We also found that the broadcast agenda of fact-checkers centred on party political agendas and drew on a narrow range of institutional sources to question claims. Overall, we argue that if broadcasters relied more heavily on their fact-checking in routine coverage—beyond election campaigns—they would more effectively counter mis/disinformation, especially if a wider range of expert sources were drawn upon to scrutinize claims.

Item Type:	Article
Date Type:	Publication
Status:	Published
Schools:	Journalism, Media and Culture
Publisher:	Taylor and Francis Group
ISSN:	1461-670X
Funders:	AHRC
Date of First Compliant Deposit:	31 January 2023
Date of Acceptance:	9 January 2023
Last Modified:	04 Jul 2023 13:57
URI:	https://orca.cardiff.ac.uk/id/eprint/156407

Actions (repository staff only)

Edit Item