Almost nobody sets out to spread misinformation. It travels because sharing is frictionless and checking feels like work. The good news is that the checking part is far quicker than most people assume — the researchers who do this professionally aren't reading every article to the end, they're running a handful of fast moves and stopping the moment something fails. You can run the same moves.
The steps below are adapted from the SIFT method developed by digital-literacy researcher Mike Caulfield, who built it by watching how fact-checkers evaluate sources. Most of the time you won't need all six — a claim that fails step one or two rarely survives step three. Run them in order and stop as soon as something breaks.
The 30-second checklist
Notice how it made you feel
The first move isn't research — it's a pause. Content built to spread is usually built to provoke: outrage, fear, vindication, the urge to be first. Mike Caulfield's SIFT method opens with exactly this instruction — Stop — because a strong emotional pull is the reliable signal that you're about to share on reflex. When a post makes you want to hit share immediately, that's the moment to slow down, not speed up.
Read laterally — leave the page
Don't judge a source by how polished it looks. Professional fact-checkers do the opposite of what most people do: instead of scrolling deeper into the article, they open new tabs and ask what other outlets say about this source and this claim. Caulfield calls it 'investigate the source'; researchers call it lateral reading. A slick layout tells you nothing; what independent, established outlets say about the source tells you a lot.
Look for who else is reporting it
If a genuinely major claim is real, more than one credible outlet will carry it — usually within hours. Search the core claim in your own words and see who's covering it. One anonymous account or a single unfamiliar site making a huge assertion that nobody else reports is a warning sign, not a scoop. FAXTR's search box surfaces whether 100+ fact-checking organizations have already looked at a claim, which is often faster than reading five news sites yourself.
Reverse image search any photo or screenshot
Images are the most recycled element in viral misinformation. Drop the picture into Google Lens, TinEye, or Yandex Images and check whether it's older than the story claims. A photo presented as 'happening now' that already lived on a stock site or a 2019 news report isn't breaking news — it's context stripped away. Bellingcat's investigation toolkit treats reverse image search as a baseline check before trusting any image-based claim. Screenshots deserve the same treatment: crop out the phone status bar and interface chrome first so the search engine matches the actual content.
Trace it back to the primary source
Most viral claims are a summary of a summary of something. Keep clicking until you reach the actual document — the study, the court filing, the official statement, the full video rather than the 12-second clip. Often the original says something more measured than the version going around, or includes a date and context that changes the meaning entirely. If you can't find any primary source, the claim is hearsay no matter how many accounts repeat it.
Check the date and the context
Old, true stories get re-shared as if they just happened, and real quotes get cropped to reverse their meaning. Look at the publish date, the original upload time, and whether a clip has been cut off at a convenient point. 'Out of date' and 'out of context' account for an enormous share of misleading content that is, technically, made of real material.
Red flags that should slow you down
You don't need to run the full checklist on everything. These four signals are the ones worth training yourself to notice — any of them means it's worth a proper look before you pass it on.
Urgency language
“Share before they delete this,” “they don't want you to see this.” Manufactured urgency exists to stop you from checking.
No named source
No author, no outlet, no link to anything you can trace. Screenshots of screenshots are a classic way to launder an unverifiable claim.
Strong emotional framing
Language engineered to make you furious or afraid. UNESCO's #ThinkBeforeSharing guidance names emotional manipulation as a core misinformation technique.
Too perfectly on your side
A claim that confirms exactly what you already believe deserves the same scrutiny as one that doesn't — arguably more, because you're inclined to wave it through.
What to do when you can't tell
Sometimes you run the checks and still can't confirm a claim either way. That's a normal outcome, and the right response is simply not to share it yet. UNESCO's guidance frames it well: before passing something on, ask where it came from, who benefits from it spreading, and who could be hurt if it's wrong. A true claim will still be true tomorrow, once someone credible has confirmed it. There's no cost to waiting and a real cost to being the person who amplified something false.
Why sharing is where it counts
Misinformation doesn't spread because a few bad actors post it — it spreads because ordinary people forward it in good faith. That also means the checkpoint that matters most isn't the platform's or the fact-checker's; it's the second before you tap share. Building this thirty-second habit does more to slow the spread than any single tool, because it puts the check exactly where the decision is made.
Check a claim before you share it
FAXTR searches 100+ fact-checking organizations in one query — free, no login required. See whether a claim already has a verdict in seconds.