Check the original report, not a screenshot or a claim about what it said. Read the headline, opening paragraphs, captions, links, and any correction note together. Then compare the account with primary records and later reporting. A demonstrable error can show that a report was wrong; establishing a recurring pattern requires a defined sample of stories and consistent criteria.
Use the examples in this section to investigate four concrete questions: whether a headline identifies the attack that prompted an Israeli response; how Gaza casualty figures, images, and access limits are described; whether an official statement changes across languages; and what negotiation records say before security actions are discussed. Start with headline framing and correction checks, then review Gaza reporting sources and access, official statements across languages, and the chronology of peace negotiations.
Build a checkable record
Save the publication date, headline as first published, article URL, byline, and a copy or screenshot of the page. Record later headline changes and corrections with their timestamps. Separate what the report states from what a source says and what the reporter independently confirms. An article that attributes a claim to an official has not necessarily verified it.
Look for named people, locations, dates, documents, and clear attribution. For casualty data, identify the collecting body, the date of its figures, whether combatant and civilian status is reported, and whether an independent method confirms the count. For images, read the full caption and check the photographer, location, date, and what the frame leaves outside view. For official statements, preserve both language versions and identify who translated them.
Use the outlet’s own standards
Compare a report with the outlet’s published rules and its treatment of similar cases. Reuters’ standards call for clear accounts of facts, care around bias, and accountability to readers. Those principles give a reader specific questions to ask: Is the actor named? Is a disputed claim attributed? Does a later correction fix the original headline as well as the article text?
A dated example helps illustrate the method. On February 3, 2016, CBS first published a headline about three people killed in Jerusalem that omitted the attack on Israeli police; after Israel’s Foreign Ministry objected, CBS changed the headline. The Jerusalem Post’s account records the initial wording and the change. CAMERA’s dated headline examples provide other cases to check against the original stories. Each case supports scrutiny of that report; a claim about an outlet-wide pattern needs a defined set of headlines, comparison rules, and results readers can reproduce.