Skip to Main Content

Fake Online Information v. Real Online Information

When we search for information using a search engine, sometimes our results consist of a lot of junk! This guide is to assist you with using the CRAAP test to identify what is junk/fake information and what is real.

Reading Online News

Applying the CRAAP Test (Currency-Relevancy-Authority-Accuracy-Purpose) to online news takes a few seconds that can save you the trouble, confusion, and embarrassment of reading fake news. Consider the following questions:

1. Currency: When was the story published? Are there follow-up reports?

2. Relevancy: Does the story stay on subject? Does the story link out to advertisements? 

3. Authority: Who is the author? Dose the report mention outside sources of information that can be verified? What is the URL? Websites that end in ".com.co" or names that end in "lo" (ex: Newslo.com) are NOT news websites*.

4. Accuracy: Can you fact check the information?

5. Purpose:  Is the news story informational and balanced? Does the story offer many perspectives on the central topic or does it seem to focus on just one opinion/agenda?

*"False, Misleading, Clickbait-y, and Satirical 'News' Sources" by Melissa Zimdars is licensed under CC by 4.0

Example 1

Nytimes.com

1. Currency: Recent news.

2. Relevancy: The article is written on my topic.

3. Authority: The NY Times is an established newspaper that publishes corrections to their stories. The author is an actual reporter with a contact profile on the NY Times website.

4. Accuracy: I am able to fact check quotes with other news stories and speeches.

5. Purpose: The article is informative and offers both a critical and explanatory perspective. 

Results: REAL information!

Title: In a Facebook post Friday, Mr. Zuckerberg said the company was considering third-party verification, better automated detection and simpler ways to flag suspicious content. Text: SAN FRANCISCO — After more than a week of accusations that the spread of fake news on Facebook may have affected the outcome of the presidential election, Mark Zuckerberg published a detailed post Friday night describing ways the company was considering dealing with the problem. Mr. Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chairman and chief executive, broadly outlined some of the options he said the company’s news feed team was looking into, including third-party verification services, better automated detection tools and simpler ways for users to flag suspicious content. “The problems here are complex, both technically and philosophically,” Mr. Zuckerberg wrote. “We believe in giving people a voice, which means erring on the side of letting people share what they want whenever possible.” The post was perhaps the most detailed glimpse into Mr. Zuckerberg’s thinking on the issue since Donald J. Trump ’s defeat of Hillary Clinton in the Nov. 8 election. Within hours of his victory being declared, Facebook was accused of affecting the election’s outcome by failing to stop bogus news stories, many of them favorable to Mr. Trump, from proliferating on its social network. Executives and employees at all levels of the company have since been debating its role and responsibilities . Facebook initially tried to play down concerns about the issue, with Mr. Zuckerberg calling the notion that the company swayed the election “ a pretty crazy idea ” at a technology conference on Nov. 10. In a follow-up Facebook post, he said that less than 1 percent of the news posted to Facebook was false. But questions continued from outside the company, with some complaining that it was being too dismissive of its capacity to affect public opinion. In a news conference in Berlin on Thursday, President Obama denounced the spread of misinformation on Facebook and other platforms. Mr. Zuckerberg came to no conclusions in his post on Friday, instead providing a list of possible solutions the company was exploring. One option, he said, could be attaching warnings to news articles shared on Facebook that have been flagged as false by reputable third parties or by Facebook users. Another could be making it harder for websites to make money from spreading misinformation on Facebook, he said. Mr. Zuckerberg made it clear that Facebook would take care to avoid looking or acting like a media company, a label it has frequently resisted. “We need to be careful not to discourage sharing of opinions or mistakenly restricting accurate content,” Mr. Zuckerberg wrote. “We do not want to be arbiters of truth ourselves, but instead rely on our community and trusted third parties.” Source URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/business/media/facebook-considering-ways-to-combat-fake-news-mark-zuckerberg-says.html?partner=bloomberg Credit: MIKE ISAAC

Isaac, M. (2016, November 19). Facebook Considering Ways to Combat Fake News, Mark Zuckerberg Says. Retrieved December 05, 2016, from http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/business/media/facebook-considering-ways-to-combat-fake-news-mark-zuckerberg-says.html

Example 2

Theonion.com

1. Currency: Recent news.

2. Relevancy: Yes, it relates to my research topic.

3. Authority: No author is listed. The website is a farcical/comedic news related website.

4. Accuracy: All information is opinion based and not informative.

5. Purpose: The agenda of the information is to be humorous and not informational or balance.

Results: Junk! Toss it out!

Title: Facebook User Verifies Truth Of Article By Carefully Checking It Against Own Preconceived Opinions Published: December 1, 2016 Text:CLARKSVILLE, TN—Explaining that people need to be critical of the news stories that circulate on social media these days, area Facebook user James Wheatley, 44, reportedly took the time to verify the truth of an article he came across Thursday by carefully checking it against the opinions he already holds. “You can’t just accept everything you see online, which is why I always take a closer look at the claims that are made in every article and make sure that each one of them is backed up by my existing assumptions and personal feelings about the world,” said Wheatley, who told reporters he had to correct several friends on Facebook earlier this week after an investigation of his beliefs and individual political perspectives proved the articles they had posted to be entirely false. “There are all kinds of bogus news stories out there, so it’s important to take a step back and hold each article up against my personal convictions to find out for myself whether what I’m reading is true or not. It’s pretty sad, but once I got in the habit of looking at articles this way, I could see just how many awful sites there are on the internet that don’t even adhere to the most basic tenets of my individual worldview, so now I just disregard them completely.” At press time, Wheatley was said to have shared the article he had verified this morning along with a message demanding his friends “educate [themselves] about what’s really happening in the world.”

Facebook User Verifies Truth Of Article By Carefully Checking It Against Own Preconceived Opinions. (2016, December 01). Retrieved December 05, 2016, from http://www.theonion.com/article/facebook-user-verifies-truth-article-carefully-che-54790

Ask a Librarian

Social Media News

Can you think of how to apply the CRAAP Test to the "news stories" shared in your FB feed or Twitter feed?

Consider the following questions:

1. Currency: When was this story shared with me? When was the story written? Is it still current?

2. Relevancy: Why is this "news" being shared? What's the agenda?

3. Authority: Who is sharing this "news"? Why should I trust this person?

4. Accuracy: Can you fact check the information? How do you know this is "real news"?

5. Purpose: Is the "news" entertaining or sensational? Does it share information to be informed or to generate attention/gossip? Consider the motive or purpose of the information.