Glossary

The political (left/right) or establishment (pro-establishment/establishment-critical) leaning of a source.

Determining what is true is notoriously hard even without vested interests at play: top physicists believed in the wrong theory of gravity for centuries. We ask our editorial team to prioritize primary sources where possible, while ensuring secondary sources (e.g. news media) are also used to provide broader context.

For controversies about what happened, we define a fact as something that sources on opposite sides of the relevant controversy agree on (for example, CNN and Fox News for a U.S. abortion story).

For controversies about what was said or claimed, we prefer using a primary source, defined as a first-hand, original account of an event or topic, created at the time by a person or organization who was directly involved or witnessed it. This of course does not mean a primary source is inherently truthful: We therefore treat a claim from a primary source as the fact that this person or organization has made this claim, rather than making a value judgment about whether that claim is true.

A forecast from the Metaculus community predicting the outcome of an event of major significance.

The origin of the information used in our coverage. Sources include both old/traditional and new/alternative media, as well as primary sources

A first-hand, original account of an event or topic, created at the time of the event by a person or organization who was directly involved or witnessed it, who has no vested interest in the issue.

The perspective or argument presented by a particular side in a controversy. Narratives are essentially opinion-based rather than fact-based. We provide a range of narratives within our stories and do our best to "steelman" each of them, i.e. capture the strongest arguments on each side.

A Verity news report covering a specific news event, structured to separate fact from spin. Verity stories are drafted with AI assistance and thoroughly reviewed by a team of human editors.

A broader overview of a topic related to our daily news coverage. Context stories provide background, while keeping fact and spin separate. They are drafted with AI assistance and thoroughly reviewed by human editors.

An in-depth article on a particular topic of interest and newsworthiness that provides broad analysis from various angles, while keeping fact and spin separate. Deep dives are researched and drafted with AI assistance and thoroughly reviewed by human editors.

A tool that allows users to read external news articles while adjusting their bias stances, including political and establishment stances.

A diverse collection of claims made by various public figures on a particular topic of debate that is presented in a highly accessible format.

A prediction made by a public figure on a controversial topic.

A relevant individual featured in Verity coverage, such as a politician, scientist, academic, journalist or business leader.

A reliability score for public figures based on how accurately they predict the outcomes of controversial topics.

Reflects the mainstream US right-wing viewpoint on general left-right controversies, such as pro-life, immigration reduction, gun rights, anti-tax, and anti-DEI.

Reflects the mainstream left-wing viewpoint on general left-right controversies, such as pro-choice, pro-immigration, gun control, pro-welfare and pro-DEI.

Reflects the libertarian perspective by emphasizing individual freedom and minimal state intervention, particularly in economic policy, civil liberties, and social affairs.

Reflects the progressive perspective on societal improvement by advocating for reform and proactive change in areas such as social justice, environmental protection, and economic equity.

Reflects the conservative perspective of upholding traditional values and endorsing a cautious approach to change across social, economic, and cultural issues. This label is also used to characterize the Conservative political party narratives in non-U.S. contexts such as the UK and Canada.

Reflects viewpoints typically aligned with the UK or Canada's Labour Party.

Reflects viewpoints typically aligned with the UK's Reform Party.

Reflects viewpoints typically aligned with the US Republican Party.

Reflects viewpoints typically aligned with the US Democratic Party.

Supports Donald Trump's leadership and associated MAGA viewpoints, typically in geopolitical contexts where his positions diverge from traditional US establishment views or those of Western allies. It can also be applied to domestic stories when a clear gap exists between mainstream Republican stances and Trump's views.

Critiques Donald Trump's leadership and promotes alternative approaches. This is used primarily in geopolitical contexts where his positions diverge from traditional US establishment views or those of Western allies, but can also be used for domestic stories if there is a consensus across the aisle against Trump, or in situations where the mainstream Democratic Party has not firmly commented on a specific Trump action or statement.

Reflects viewpoints supportive of the US establishment (here defined as the US government, its allies, and powerful US corporations). This stance applies to debates that occur between party centers and fringes rather than between mainstream Democrats and Republicans, or between a powerful corporation and its critics. These labels are used primarily for US-specific stories; for conflict between the US establishment and other nations, country-specific labels (e.g., anti-China) are preferred. When stories involve another country but primarily comment on US policy, the establishment framework may still be applied.

Reflects viewpoints critical of the US establishment (here defined as the US government, its allies, and powerful US corporations). This stance applies to debates that occur between party centers and fringes rather than between mainstream Democrats and Republicans, or between a powerful corporation and its critics. These labels are used primarily for US-specific stories; for conflict between the US establishment and other countries, country-specific labels (e.g. pro-China) are preferred. When stories involve another country but primarily comment on US policy, the establishment framework may still be applied.

Reflects viewpoints critical of China's government and policies, emphasizing concerns that align with Western perspectives.

Reflects viewpoints supportive of China's government and policies as legitimate responses to global challenges, and is generally critical of the West.

Reflects viewpoints critical of Iranian policies and actions, aligning with Western establishment narratives.

Reflects viewpoints that defend or justify Iranian policies, presenting them as legitimate under international pressures. It is generally critical of the West.

Reflects viewpoints supportive of North Korea's government and policies, and is generally critical of the West.

Reflects viewpoints critical of North Korea's policies, in line with Western establishment narratives.

Reflects viewpoints supportive of Russia's policies and international stance, and particularly its actions in the context of the Russia-Ukraine war.

Reflects viewpoints that support Ukraine and particularly its actions in the context of the Russia-Ukraine war.

Reflects viewpoints that support Israel's policies and actions, particularly in relation to conflicts in the Middle East.

Reflects viewpoints that support Palestinian aspirations for self-determination and statehood.

Reflects the pro-Europe perspective, especially in contexts where European and American approaches diverge.

Reflects viewpoints that embrace technology as a key driver of progress, believing that scientific and technological innovations will solve major societal challenges and enhance quality of life.

Reflects viewpoints that express caution or criticism regarding the rapid advancement of technology, emphasizing potential risks, ethical concerns, and unintended negative consequences on society.

Reflects viewpoints that advocate for robust, proactive measures to address climate change and promote environmental justice. For more weather science or climate science-specific narratives, "Climate concerned narrative" may be used alternatively.

Used for climate-related stories that highlight concerns about the impact of climate change on specific weather events, without explicitly advocating for particular policy actions.

Reflects viewpoints that question the attribution of weather events to climate change and doubt the overall scientific basis, effectiveness, or economic impact of sweeping climate policies, often urging caution before enacting rapid policy shifts.

Used for spins transcending a standard controversy, for example by arguing that it's really about money or power, or that both sides are hypocritical.

Some controversies can't be shoehorned into traditional left/right or establishment classifications, so we instead use the neutral options A/B. However, this is used as a last resort.

Well-established, mass media organizations that have historically dominated the media landscape, such as the New York Times, the BBC, and CNN.

Media organizations and other mass communication platforms that have emerged with the internet, including Substacks, personal blogs, social media, and non-mainstream news sites such as Consortium Wed, The Grayzone, or The Daily Wire.