Our Methodology
Exactly how FAXTR collects, verifies, and presents information — every step in the open.
We don't decide what's true. We help you find out.
FAXTR does not independently declare a claim 'true' or 'false'. Instead, we aggregate verdicts from recognized fact-checking organizations, news sources from multiple countries, and official data — so you can compare them in one place. The final judgment is always yours.
Data Sources
Every public data source FAXTR uses
Google Fact Check Tools API
Auto-fetched 3× daily
Verified fact-checks from global organizations
Sources: AFP, Reuters, Snopes, PolitiFact, Full Fact, FactCheck.org, Chequeado, Boom Live, Africa Check, Taiwan FactCheck Center, and 100+ more
Google News RSS
3× daily for CrossCheck
Actual news coverage from each country
Sources: USA, UK, Korea, Japan, China, Russia, France, India, Iran, Germany, Brazil
KCNA Watch
3× daily
North Korea state media monitoring
Sources: KCNA (Korean Central News Agency) official broadcasts
Official Government Releases
Manually curated
Compare government claims vs official data
Sources: 국가 통계청, 중앙은행, 국방부 공식 발표 / National statistics bureaus, central banks, defense ministries
How We Classify Verdicts
We convert each organization's text rating into a standardized label
falsefakefabricatedincorrectpants on fireOriginal organization rated the claim as false
truecorrectaccurateOriginal organization rated the claim as true
halfpartlypartialmixedmostlymisleadingout of contextPartially true or missing context
(anything else)Organizations disagree or classification is unclear
Important: FAXTR does not alter the original organization's verdict. We only map the textual rating to a standardized label. The original rating and a direct link are always provided.
What the AI Fact Check Actually Does
What happens when you paste a claim
Text sent (HTTPS encrypted)
Your claim is sent to Google Fact Check Tools API. FAXTR does not store your input.
Search existing fact-check DB
Google's global fact-check database (100+ organizations) is searched for similar claims.
Map the verdict
The found organization's textual rating is mapped to TRUE/FALSE/HALF/DISPUTED using the classification rules above.
Show with original source
Results always include the original organization's name and review link. FAXTR's role as aggregator is clearly labeled.
When no verification exists
If no existing check exists, we show 'UNVERIFIED'. FAXTR never independently judges true/false.
Source verification (publisher badge)
Issued per article. It asserts only what can be mechanically re-checked.
1. Provenance
Which organisation issued the original document, when it was received and through which channel — recorded at the point of receipt.
2. Match against the source
The published text is compared with the source document. If it was edited, the record says so rather than hiding it.
3. Fingerprint & tamper monitoring
The body at the time of verification is fingerprinted with SHA-256 and published, then re-checked periodically. The rule is public, so anyone can recompute it themselves.
4. Misinformation cross-check
Checked against ClaimReview records from 100+ organisations, requiring real lexical overlap so unrelated results are never reported as a match.
What the badge does not judge
Whether the announcement itself is true, whether the figures the source quoted are accurate, and any editorial judgement are outside the scope — and every record says so. Badges can also be revoked: if the article is edited away from its source, if the source document is withdrawn, or if a debunk later matches, the badge is withdrawn and the record says so.
Full badge programme →What We Don't Do
Standards We Follow
IFCN Code of Principles Compliance
FAXTR follows the International Fact-Checking Network's 5 principles: Non-partisanship, Transparency of Sources, Transparency of Funding, Transparency of Methodology, and Open Corrections Policy.
Corrections Policy
We correct errors quickly and publish what was changed. Readers can report errors via /contact at any time.
Source Linking
Every fact-check includes a link to the original organization's review. Readers can verify directly at the source.
Found an error? Report it →