Find Elections and Politics Information: Tools for evaluating news articles

1. Stop

2. Investigate the source

3. Find better coverage

4. Trace claims, quotes, and media to the original context

The SIFT method is an evaluation strategy developed by digital literacy expert, Mike Caulfield, to help determine whether online content can be trusted for credible or reliable sources of information. All SIFT information on this page is shared from UChicago Library's Evaluating Resources and Misinformation page with a CC BY 4.0 license.

The next step before sharing is to Investigate the Source.

Take a moment to look up the author and source publishing the information.

What can you find about the author/website creators? ​

What is their mission? Do they have vested interests? ​Would their assessment be biased?

Do they have authority in the area?​

Use lateral reading. Go beyond the 'About Us' section on the organization's website and see what other, trusted sources say about the source.​ You can use Google or Wikipedia to investigate the source.

Hovering is another technique to learn more about who is sharing information, especially on social media platforms such as Twitter.

The next step is to Find Better Coverage or other sources that may or may not support the original claim.

Again, use lateral reading to see if you can find other sources corroborating the same information or disputing it.​

What coverage is available on the topic? 

Keep track of trusted news sources.

Many times, fact checkers have already looked into the claims. These fact-checkers are often nonpartisan, nonprofit websites that try to increase public knowledge and understanding by fact checking claims to see if they are based on fact or if they are biased/not supported by evidence.

The final step is to Trace Claims, Quotes, and Media to their Original Context.

When an article references a quote from an expert, or results of a research study, it is good practice to attempt to locate the original source of the information.​ Click through the links to follow the claims to the original source of information. Open up the original reporting sources listed in a bibliography if present

Was the claim, quote, or media fairly represented?

Does the extracted information support the original claims in the research? ​

Is information being cherry-picked to support an agenda or a bias?​

Is information being taken out of context?​

Remember, headlines, blog posts, or tweets may sensationalize facts to get more attention or clicks. ​Re-reporting may omit, misinterpret, or select certain facts to support biased claims. If the claim is taken from a source who took it from another source, important facts and contextual information can be left out. Make sure to read the claims in the original context in which they were presented.

Analyzing the content of every article regardless of its source is essential to becoming an informed citizen. Even biased sources can include fair, objective news items, and news from them should not be ignored just because of the source. So don't rely on one news source for all your information! Read widely and fact-check as much as possible.

Leave the site to research it. Don’t trust the “about us” page. Don't trust anything the site says about its own purpose or reputation. Research the name of the sponsoring organization to see if there is information that clarifies its purpose and its reputation as a news source.

Ignore the order of search results in Google. Some sites pay Google to be listed high in the search results, and some sites pay Google to place ads in the search results (see box on this page called Google Search Results). Look deep into the search results, not just at the first 10 offerings.

Are the sources cited? Is there documentation? Have claims been backed up by relevant documentation, such as studies, records, statistics and other fact-based evidence?

Watch for "click-bait." If the headline or link makes an outrageous claim, it is probably trying to get you to click on it for profit.

Watch for inflammatory language, as well as more subtle forms of persuasion. If the site makes you angry or emotional in some way, be aware that you may be the victim of manipulation. Read other sources, do some fact-checking. If it is something you really agree strongly with, beware of confirmation bias. Read some sources from the other perspectives.

If the site allows readers to comment, read them. Frequently you find that people are disputing what an author says and giving additional or contradictory evidence.

Read multiple sources of information to get a variety of viewpoints and media frames. Watch out if known/reputable news sites are not reporting on a story you heard about in a less-reputable source. Sometimes lack of coverage is the result of corporate media bias and other factors, but there should typically be more than one source reporting on a topic or event.