Fact-checking in journalism:an epistemological framework

Fact-checking has become an enduring form of journalism that can influence public discussion and counter false content on mass media and social media platforms. However, communication scholars have questioned some epistemological premises of fact-checking and their embeddedness in journalistic practices. This study examines the validity of this criticism by defining three deep-rooted challenges threatening to compromise the epistemological basis of fact-checking. We analysed the problems related to degrees of objectivism, truth regimes, and causal relations across five different aspects of fact-checking to trace where epistemological concerns originate and how they can be resolved. Consequently, we provide a set of measures (rigour, presentation, and audience engagement) that can be used to explore the nature of epistemological problems in fact-checking contexts. We argue that these measures can support and reinforce the epistemological foundations of fact-checking if they are applied in a way that transparently recognises the subjective elements included in fact-checking work. Recognition of subjective elements is essential when developing novel and existing fact-checking methods, given the risks of bias replication and subjectivity in AI-powered systems and other technological solutions.