This report presents the most interesting findings from research on political approaches to information disruption in the Nordic countries.

The countries examined in the report—Norway, Denmark, Sweden, and Finland—perform well in many statistical reports on media and democracy.

This prompts a closer qualitative investigation of the Nordic fact-checkers and their work.

This report presents results from interviews with the four largest Nordic fact-checking organizations: Faktisk.no (NO), Tjekdet (DK), Källkritikbyrån (SE), and Faktabaari (FI).

The study explores how the Nordic fact-checkers operationalize their policies and principles.

The main areas of interest that have been examined are:

1. What the concept of fact-checking means to the Nordic fact-checking organizations
2. How the Nordic fact-checkers define their policies and codes of conduct
3. How the Nordic fact-checkers structure their work in their newsrooms
4. How the Nordic fact-checkers view their work in relation to news media
5. How the Nordic fact-checkers relate to their audience
6. What economic challenges the Nordic fact-checkers face
7. What technological challenges the Nordic fact-checkers face

The report concludes, among other things, that fact-checking is significantly different from news journalism. Fact-checking is an auditing activity that helps to discover what can be said about a claim, while news journalists traditionally report news. Investigative journalism, however, is closely related to fact-checking activities.

The roles and significance of fact-checkers, as well as the added value they bring to journalism, are not fully understood by commercial and public service media in the Nordic countries. News media in Denmark, Sweden, and Finland handle their fact-checking needs internally through their own journalists. An exception is Norway, where collaboration with media owners works in a mutually beneficial way.

Not least, Facebook is a central focus of the fact-checkers’ daily work.

The difficulties associated with filter bubbles have increased and will likely continue, resulting in segmented parts of society that are inaccessible to fact-checkers.

The work of fact-checkers differs significantly across the four countries. There are well-developed routines and large editorial teams in Norway and Denmark. In Sweden and Finland, the organizations are smaller entities.

All except the Finnish fact-checkers are Facebook-certified partners.

All except the Finnish fact-checkers are members of the IFCN and have adapted their policies to meet the IFCN’s requirements.

The funding principles and resources of the fact-checkers vary greatly. Fact-checkers need a functioning national policy to secure their funding. This should be a model that simultaneously guarantees their independence.