Did you know that Current Events have a history?
All current events and news are connected to other times, other places, and other events.
Everything happens for a reason.
(Image by TheAndrasBarta from Pixabay)
Here are 10 great sites to help you check facts and identify bias. Most descriptions of these sites are from Jennifer Snelling at ITSE
While not a fact-checking site, AllSides curates stories from right, center and left-leaning media so that readers can easily compare how bias influences reporting on each topic.
This nonpartisan, nonprofit project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania monitors the factual accuracy of what is said by U.S. political players, including politicians, TV ads, debates, interviews and news releases.
Know Your Meme is a website dedicated to documenting Internet phenomena: viral videos, image macros, catchphrases, web celebs and more.
Media Bias / Fact Check
An independent online media outlet, MBFC is dedicated to educating the public on media bias and deceptive news practices. This website compiles fact checks from around the world using strict criteria. Extensive "About Us" information provides transparency and accountability.
This nonprofit and self-described liberal-leaning research center monitors and corrects conservative misinformation in the media.
A project of the conservative Media Research Center, NewsBusters is focused on “documenting, exposing and neutralizing liberal media bias.”
This nonpartisan, independent and nonprofit website run by the Center for Responsive Politics tracks how much and where candidates get their money.
This Pulitzer Prize winning website rates the accuracy of claims by elected officials. Run by editors and reporters from the independent newspaper Tampa Bay Times, Politicfact features the Truth-O-Meter that rates statements as “True,” “Mostly True,” “Half True,” “False,” and “Pants on Fire.”
This independent, nonprofit newsroom has won several Pulitzer Prizes, including the 2016 Prize for Explanatory Reporting. ProPublica produces investigative journalism in the public interest.
This independent, nonpartisan website run by professional researcher and writer David Mikkelson researches urban legends and other rumors. It is often the first to set the facts straight on wild fake news claims.
This nonpartisan, nonprofit organization uses public policy data-based journalism to make politics more transparent and accountable.
Although the Washington Post has a left-center bias, its checks are excellent and sourced. The bias shows up because they fact check conservative claims more than liberal ones.
OPVL: Origins, Purpose, Values, Limitations
Origin, Purpose, Value and Limitation (OPVL) is a technique for analyzing historical documents. It is used extensively in the International Baccalaureate curriculum and testing materials, and is incredibly helpful in teaching students to be critical observers. It is also known as Document Based Questions (DBQ).
In order to analyze a source, you must first know what it is. Sometimes not all of these questions can be answered. The more you do know about where a document is coming from, the easier it is to ascertain purpose, value and limitation. The definition of primary and secondary source materials can be problematic. There is constant debate among academic circles on how to definitively categorize certain documents and there is no clear rule of what makes a document a primary or a secondary source.
1. Who created it?
2. Who is the author?
3. When was it created?
4. When was it published?
5. Where was it published?
6. Who is publishing it?
7. Is there anything we know about the author that is pertinent to our evaluation?
This is the point where you start the real evaluation of the piece and try to figure out the purpose for its creation. You must be able to think as the author of the document. At this point you are still only focusing on the single piece of work you are evaluating.
Now comes the hard part. Putting on your historian hat, you must determine: Based on who wrote it, when/where it came from and why it was created … what value does this document have as a piece of evidence? This is where you show your expertise and put the piece in context. Bring in your outside information at this point.
The task here is not to point out weaknesses of the source, but rather to say: at what point does this source cease to be of value to us as historians?
With a primary source document, having an incomplete picture of the whole is a given because the source was created by one person (or a small group of people), naturally they will not have given every detail of the context. Do not say that the author left out information unless you have concrete proof (from another source) that they chose to leave information out.
Also, it is obvious that the author did not have prior knowledge of events that came after the creation of the document. Do not state that the document “does not explain X” (if X happened later).
Being biased does not limit the value of a source! If you are going to comment on the bias of a document, you must go into detail. Who is it biased towards? Who is it biased against? What part of a story does it leave out? Sometimes a biased piece of work shows much about the history you are studying
This is again an area for you to show your expertise of the context. You need to briefly explain the parts of the story that the document leaves out. Give examples of other documents that might mirror or answer this document. What parts of the story/context can this document not tell?
Source: IB Higher Level History of the Americas & Honor's 10 English
The databases below require login credentials. Please see the password document in the Research Databases box.
* indicates sites not available in China