国際ファクトチェックネットワーク（International Fact-Checking Network、IFCN）は、ファクトチェック活動の原則についての綱領 “Code of Principles” を定めています。
「非党派性と公正性」「情報源の基準と透明性」「資金源と組織の透明性」「検証方法の基準と透明性」「オープンで誠実な訂正方針」という5つの原則です。
世界中のファクトチェッカーが議論して2016年9月に制定されたもので、国際標準のファクトチェックの原則として認知されています。
IFCNは2017年から、この綱領に基づいて加盟団体の審査を開始しました。2020年4月には、より詳細な基準を盛り込んだ改定版を公表しました。この基準に基づいて、2022年4月現在、IFCNに100以上の団体が加盟し、20以上の団体が更新審査中となっています（IFCN加盟団体リスト）。
2020年改定版では詳細なガイドラインも公表されました。これはIFCNに正式に加盟する際の審査基準です。
2020年に5つの基本原則自体は、若干の語句の修正があっただけで、初版（現在非公開）とほぼ同じ内容です。
ですので、ファクトチェック活動の基本原則を理解するうえでは、この5原則を押さえておくことがまず重要でしょう。
ＦＩＪは、日本国内で活動する上での実践的な指針として、IFCNの綱領の趣旨を踏まえた「ファクトチェック・ガイドライン」を発表していますので、こちらもぜひご参考にしてください。
IFCNのCode of Principles（対訳）
前文
This code of principles is for organizations that regularly publish non-partisan reports on the accuracy of statements by public figures and prominent institutions and other widely circulated claims related to public interest issues. It is the result of consultations among fact-checkers from around the world.
この原則に関する綱領は、公的な人物や著名な機関による言説、広範に流布されている公益の関する事項の言説の正確性について、不偏不党の立場から記事を恒常的に発表している団体のためのものです。これは、世界中のファクトチェッカーの協議を経て作られたものです。
IFCN加盟資格について
IFCN signatory status may be granted to legally registered organizations set up for the purpose of fact-checking that regularly publish non-partisan reports on the factual accuracy of statements by public figures and prominent institutions and widely circulated claims in text, visual and other formats focused primarily on claims related to public interest issues.
IFCN signatory status may not be granted to organizations whose editorial work is controlled by the state, a political party or politician. It may however be granted to organizations that receive funding from state or political sources to carry out public service journalism if the IFCN assessor determines there is clear and unambiguous separation of editorial control from state or political influence.
Applications are assessed by independent assessors for compliance with 31 criteria. Their assessment is reviewed by the IFCN advisory board to ensure fairness and consistency across the network. Please read all criteria, shown below, before applying.
IFCN加盟団体の資格は、公的な人物や著名な機関による言説、主に公益に関する事項に焦点を当ててテキスト、ビジュアルその他の形で広範に流布されている言説の正確性について、不偏不党の立場から記事を恒常的に発表するファクトチェックを目的として設立された法人に付与されます。
IFCN加盟団体の資格は、政府や政党もしくは政治家に強く影響を受けている団体には付与されません。ただし、政府や政治的な主体から資金援助を受けていても、公益ジャーナリズムの実現を目的とし、IFCN審査員が政府や政治的影響と編集の分離が明確で、曖昧な関係ではないと認めたときは、その資格が付与されることもあります。
加盟申請社は31の審査基準に合致しているかどうかを独立した審査員によって審査されます。審査員の審査内容は、IFCNのネットワーク全体からみて公正かつ一貫性のあるものかどうか確認するためにIFCNの諮問委員会がチェックします。申請前に以下のすべての審査基準をお読みください。
詳細な審査基準
1.1 The applicant is a legally registered organization, or a distinct team or unit within a legally registered organization, and details of this are easily found on its website.
1.2 The team, unit or organization is set up exclusively for the purpose of fact-checking.
1.3 The applicant has published an average of at least one factcheck a week over the course of the six months prior to the date of application, or 12 months if operating in a country that is home to five or more existing verified signatories at the date of application.
1.4. On average, at least 75% of the applicant’s fact checks focus on claims related to issues that, in the view of the IFCN, relate to or could have an impact on the welfare or well-being of individuals, the general public or society.
1.5. The applicant’s editorial output is not, in the view of the IFCN, controlled by the state, a political party or politician.
1.6. If the organization receives funding from local or foreign state or political sources, it provides a statement on its site setting out to the satisfaction of the IFCN, how it ensures its funders do not influence the findings of its reports.
1. A Commitment to Nonpartisanship and Fairness
Signatory organizations fact-check claims using the same standard for every fact check. They do not concentrate their fact-checking on any one side. They follow the same process for every fact check and let the evidence dictate the conclusions. Signatories do not advocate or take policy positions on the issues they fact-check.
1. 非党派性と公正性
加盟団体は、全てファクトチェックにおいて同じ基準を用いて言説のファクトチェックを行います。一方のサイドに偏ったファクトチェックはしません。全てのファクトチェックを同じ手続に従って行い、証拠をもって結論を語らせるようにします。私たちは、ファクトチェックの対象とする問題について、特定の政策的立場に立ったり擁護したりすることはしません。
詳細な審査基準
2.1 The applicant fact-checks using the same high standards of evidence and judgement for equivalent claims regardless of who made the claim.
2.2 The applicant does not unduly concentrate its fact-checking on any one side, considers the reach and importance of claims it selects to check and publishes a short statement on its website to set out how it selects claims to check.
2.3 The applicant discloses in its fact checks relevant interests of the sources it quotes where the reader might reasonably conclude those interests could influence the accuracy of the evidence provided. It also discloses in its fact checks any commercial or other such relationships it has that a member of the public might reasonably conclude could influence the findings of the fact check.
2.4 The applicant is not as an organization affiliated with nor declares or shows support for any party, any politician or political candidate, nor does it advocate for or against any policy positions on any issues save for transparency and accuracy in public debate.
2.5 The applicant sets out its policy on non-partisanship for staff on its site. Save for the issues of accuracy and transparency, the applicant’s staff do not get involved in advocacy or publicise their views on policy issues the organization might fact check in such a way as might lead a reasonable member of the public to see the organization’s work as biased.
2. A Commitment to Standards and Transparency of Sources
Signatories want their readers to be able to verify findings themselves. Signatories provide all sources in enough detail that readers can replicate their work, except in cases where a source’s personal security could be compromised. In such cases, signatories provide as much detail as possible.
2. 情報源の基準と透明性
加盟社は、読者に自分たちが行った調査結果自体を検証してもらいたいと考えています。加盟社は、自分たちが行った調査を読者が再現できるよう詳細に全ての情報源を開示します。情報源の個人的な安全が損なわれる場合は例外的ですが、そのような場合でも、可能な限り詳細な情報を提供します。
詳細な審査基準
3.1 The applicant identifies the source of all significant evidence used in their fact checks, providing relevant links where the source is available online, in such a way that users can replicate their work if they wish. In cases where identifying the source would compromise the source’s personal security, the applicant provides as much detail as compatible with the source’s safety.
3.2 The applicant uses the best available primary, not secondary, sources of evidence wherever suitable primary sources are available. Where suitable primary sources are not available, the applicant explains the use of a secondary source.
3.3 The applicant checks all key elements of claims against more than one named source of evidence save where the one source is the only source relevant on the topic.
3.4 The applicant identifies in its fact checks the relevant interests of the sources it uses where the reader might reasonably conclude those interests could influence the accuracy of the evidence provided.
3. A Commitment to Transparency of Funding & Organization
Signatory organizations are transparent about their funding sources. If they accept funding from other organizations, they ensure that funders have no influence over the conclusions the fact-checkers reach in their reports. Signatory organizations detail the professional background of all key figures in the organization and explain the organizational structure and legal status. Signatories clearly indicate a way for readers to communicate with them.
3. 資金源と組織の透明性
加盟団体は、自分たちの資金源について透明性をもちます。他の組織から資金を受け入れても、資金拠出者がファクトチェックの調査で達した結論に対して全く影響を与えないことを確約します。ファクトチェックの組織における全ての重要人物の職業的背景を詳らかにし、組織の構造や法的地位についても説明します。読者が 連絡をとる方法についても明示します。
詳細な審査基準
4.1 Applicants that are independent organizations have a page on their website detailing each source of funding accounting for 5% or more of total revenue for its previous financial year. This page also sets out the legal form in which the organization is registered (e.g. as a non-profit, as a company etc).
4.2 Applicants that are the fact-checking section or unit of a media house or other parent organization make a statement on ownership.
4.3 A statement on the applicant’s website sets out the applicant’s organizational structure and makes clear how and by whom editorial control is exercised.
4.4 A page on the applicant’s website details the professional biography of all those who, according to the organizational structure and play a significant part in its editorial output.
4.5 The applicant provides easy means on its website and/or via social media for users to communicate with the editorial team.
4. A Commitment to Standards and Transparency of Methodology
Signatories explain the methodology they use to select, research, write, edit, publish and correct their fact checks. They encourage readers to send claims to fact-check and are transparent on why and how they fact-check.
4. 検証方法の基準と透明性
加盟社は、ファクトチェックを行う際の選択、調査、執筆、編集、公表、そして訂正についての方法を説明します。読者にファクトチェックすべき言説を提供するよう奨励し、自分たちがファクトチェックを行う理由や方法について透明性をもちます。
詳細な審査基準
5.1 The applicant publishes on its website a statement about the methodology it uses to select, research, write and publish its fact checks.
5.2 The applicant selects claims to check based primarily on the reach and importance of the claims, and where possible explains the reason for choosing the claim to check.
5.3 The applicant sets out in its fact checks relevant evidence that appears to support the claim as well as relevant evidence that appears to undermine it.
5.4 The applicant in its fact checks assesses the merits of the evidence found using the same high standards applied to evidence on equivalent claims, regardless of who made the claim.
5.5 The applicant seeks where possible to contact those who made the claim to seek supporting evidence, noting that (I) this is often not possible with online claims, (II) if the person who makes the claim fails to reply in a timely way this should not impede the fact check, (III) if a speaker adds caveats to the claim, the fact-checker should be free to continue with checking the original claim, (IV) fact-checkers may not wish to contact the person who made the claim for safety or other legitimate reasons.
5.6 The applicant encourages users to send in claims to check, while making it clear what readers can legitimately expect will be fact-checked and what isn’t fact-checkable.
5. A Commitment to Open & Honest Corrections Policy
Signatories publish their corrections policy and follow it scrupulously. They correct clearly and transparently in line with the corrections policy, seeking so far as possible to ensure that readers see the corrected version.
5. オープンで誠実な訂正方針
加盟社は、自分たちの訂正方針を公表し、それに厳格に従います。訂正方針に沿って明確かつ透明性をもって訂正を行い、可能な限り読者が訂正版を見れることができるように努めます。
詳細な審査基準
6.1 The applicant has a corrections or complaints policy that is easily visible and accessible on the organization’s website or frequently referenced in broadcasts.
6.2 The policy sets out clear definitions of what it does and does not cover, how major mistakes, especially those requiring revised conclusions of a fact check, are handled, and the fact that some complaints may justify no response. This policy is adhered to scrupulously.
6.3 Where credible evidence is provided that the applicant has made a mistake worthy of correction, the applicant makes a correction openly and transparently, seeking as far as possible to ensure that users of the original see the correction and the corrected version.
6.4 The applicant, if an existing signatory, should either on its corrections/complaints page or on the page where it declares itself an IFCN signatory inform users that if they believe the signatory is violating the IFCN Code, they may inform the IFCN, with a link to the IFCN site.
6.5 If the applicant is the fact-checking unit of a media company, it is a requirement of signatory status that the parent media company has and adheres to an open and honest corrections policy.
