We Review and Rate News

verimedia reviews news using the manifesto

Using the manifesto as a base, and applying a transparent rating scheme, relevant articles are reviewed and rated on a 1 to 10 scale for fact handling and context. This rating and the rationales behind are accessible online. A  draft of such a review is shown here.

Cumulative ratings are forgiving

After a journalist or a media organization has received a sufficient number of individual ratings, these form a cumulative quality rating that can be used independently, providing an indicator of how to value yet unrated content from that source. Cumulative ratings are forgiving, as the algorithm values more recent content higher. If a journalist or a media organization improve the quality based on adherence to the verimedia manifesto, this will show quickly.

The verimedia rating scheme (draft)


Primary facts (in headline or first paragraph)

Point value

verifiably correct


  • with source attribution


  • without source attribution


unverifiable (for special situations see "anonymous sources" section)


  • with source attribution


  • without source attribution


verifiably incorrect




Primary content (in headline or first paragraph)

Point value

Core message put in relevant context


  • to verifiable source/scientific evidence/standard evidence/other similar events or circumstances


  • to unverifiable other anecdotal evidence


Not put in context where context exists and is relevant



Anonymous and Unverifiable Sources

These articles have an initial "Fact" value < 5 (maximum achievable=10)

Point value

Headline and first paragraph correctly attributes unverifiable nature of content


Status and credibility of key source(s) has been verified and sufficiently described


Other verifiable sources are used to create plausibility/verification around key statements


A comment opportunity has been offered to the key target(s) of the content



Important: the verimedia rating does not review opinions

We consider it important that news sources represent differing opinions, and therefore, we do not rate them. A conservative position, when based on journalism meeting the standards of factuality and context, is as relevant as a liberal one. We firmly believe that mistakes undermining the credibility of news sources are equally made on all ends of the spectrum of opinions.

Can you rate news for facts and context?

During the design phase of this project we have been asked many times: is it even possible to rate news based on facts and context delivery, or is what we call "facts" so subjective that it becomes impossible? There are two answers to this question.

The verimedia rating does take the typical approach of fact-checking beyond easily available information, instead it looks if an article meets the criteria of properly dealing with facts by cross-checking and referencing according to editorial standards.

Second, when looking at the current problems of journalism, we found that most issues of adherence to those minimal standards are not related to nuanced interpretations of reality, but instead  so blatantly obvious that we can absolutely rate it (which hopefully leads to improvements quickly).

Front page
Article identifier
Extension download