By the end of this lesson you will be able to
- Check a source for authority, date, evidence and purpose.
- Use lateral reading to find out who is behind a page.
- Find a primary or official source for a claim.
- Compare two or more sources before deciding what to believe.
Anyone can publish anything online, free and in minutes, and a page that looks smart may be wrong, old or written to sell you something. A forwarded message with a shocking claim can reach a hundred people before anyone checks it. You do not need to be an expert to protect yourself. A few quick habits, practised by professional fact-checkers, will help you decide what to trust and what to double-check, and they work for health, money, news and computer advice alike.
Why a good-looking page is not proof
Misinformation is false or misleading information that gets shared, whether or not the person sharing it meant harm. Some of it is honest error, some is an old story that returns, some is a joke taken seriously, and some is written on purpose to deceive or to make money from clicks. A professional-looking design, a confident tone and a long list of comments do not show that a page is true, because all of those are easy to copy. What you need are checks that are hard to fake.
Four quick checks: author, date, evidence, purpose
| Check | Ask yourself | Warning signs |
|---|---|---|
| Authority | Who wrote this? Are they an expert or an organisation with a real record on this subject? | No author, no About page, or an author with no link to the topic |
| Date | When was it written or updated? Is the subject one that changes quickly? | No date, or advice about software that names an old version |
| Evidence | Does it show where facts come from, with links or named data? | Claims with no source, only “experts say” or “studies show” |
| Purpose | Why does this page exist: to inform, to sell, to persuade or to get clicks? | Urgent language, pressure to share, a sales button next to every claim |
- Named author or organisation
- Clear date, with updates shown
- Links to the original data
- Purpose is to inform; corrections shown
Use it, and still compare
- No author, or a made-up name
- No date, or very old
- Claims with no sources
- Urgent wording, sales buttons, share pleas
Check before you rely or share
Read this figure as text
Two columns comparing a source with a named author, date and evidence against one with none of them.
Two columns. Column one, Earns trust: a named author or organisation with a track record; a clear date and update date; links to the original data or documents; a purpose to inform, with corrections shown. Verdict: worth using, still compare it with another source. Column two, Be careful: no author or a made-up name; no date or an old date; claims with no sources; urgent wording, sales buttons and requests to share. Verdict: do not rely on it or share it until checked.
Lateral reading: leave the page
The strongest habit is lateral reading. Instead of staying on an unfamiliar page and studying it, open a new tab (browser tab) and ask what other sources say about the page and about who runs it. A page can claim to be an independent institute, and only outside sources can tell you that it is funded by a company that sells the product it recommends. Staying put is the natural thing to do, and it is exactly what a clever fake relies on.
Read sideways in five steps
Step 1: Note the name
Write down the name of the website or organisation, and the claim you want to check.
Step 2: Open a new tab
Keep the first page open, but do not read further. Open a second tab.
You should see: You have two tabs: the page you doubt and a blank one.
Step 3: Search for the name and for the claim
Search the organisation's name with words such as who runs, funded by or review. Search the claim itself in plain words.
You should see: You see what independent sources say, not what the page says about itself.
Step 4: Look for a primary source
Follow the claim back to the original: the official statistics, law, notice or research paper, not a story about it.
You should see: You find an original page, ideally run by a public body or the organisation concerned.
Step 5: Decide and note
Decide whether the claim is supported, unsupported or contradicted, and make a note of why.
You should see: You can say the decision in one sentence with the evidence.
- Step 1: Doubtful claim
- Step 2: Open a new tab
- Step 3: Who runs it? What do others say?
- Step 4: Find the original source
- Step 5: Compare and decide
Read this figure as text
A flow of five steps for checking a doubtful web page by opening a new tab and searching.
A flow of five numbered boxes. 1: Spot a doubtful claim on a page. 2: Open a new tab. 3: Search for who runs the page and what others say. 4: Find the primary or official source. 5: Compare at least two sources and decide.
- Can you look up the author or organisation?
- YesDoes it show evidence, such as links to original data?
- YesDo independent sources agree?
- YesDo thisReasonable to rely on; note the date
- NoDo thisCheck the original source
- NoDo thisCheck more before relying
- YesDo independent sources agree?
- NoDo thisDo not rely on it
- YesDoes it show evidence, such as links to original data?
Read this figure as text
A decision tree that asks about author, evidence and other sources and ends in rely, check more or avoid.
Start: Does the page name an author or organisation you can look up? If no: Do not rely on it. If yes: Does it show evidence, such as links to original data? If no: Check more before you rely on it. If yes: Do other independent sources agree? If yes: Reasonable to rely on, with the date noted. If no: Check the original source before you rely on it.
Original and official sources
A primary source is where information starts: the law itself, the statistics table, the manufacturer's manual, the researcher's own report. A news story, a blog or a video about those is a secondary source. Secondary sources are useful, but each step away from the original is a chance for a mistake. For computing, the official documentation is nearly always the best place to look: the Ubuntu help pages for Ubuntu, Microsoft's support pages for Windows, and the maker's website for a program. Forum posts can be helpful but may be old, so check the date and the version before you try a fix, and never paste a command you do not understand into a terminal.
Compare, and know your own bias
Look for at least two independent sources that agree. Independent means they did not just copy each other. If all the pages trace back to one post, that is one source repeated. Be honest about your own feelings too: we all believe a claim more easily when it makes us angry, scared, proud or fits what we already think. A strong emotional reaction is a good signal to pause and check, not a reason to share.
Common mistakes
✖ Instead of: Judging a site by how professional it looks.
✔ Do this: Check the author, date, evidence and purpose, then read sideways.
✖ Instead of: Sharing first and checking later.
✔ Do this: Check before you share, especially if the message makes you angry or scared.
✖ Instead of: Using one source, especially one that is selling something.
✔ Do this: Compare at least two independent sources and look for the original.
✖ Instead of: Running a command from an old forum post without reading it.
✔ Do this: Check the date and version, prefer official documentation, and understand a command before you run it.
If something goes wrong
- I cannot find who runs a website.
- Look for an About or Contact page, then search for the site name with words like review or who owns. No clear owner is itself a warning sign.
- Sources disagree with each other.
- Find the primary source, check the dates and see which has the best evidence. If experts really disagree, say so and avoid certainty.
- A page has no date.
- Look for a date in the address, the comments or the page footer, or search for the title to see when others first mentioned it. If you still cannot tell, treat it as possibly out of date.
Key terms
- misinformation
- Misinformation is false or misleading information that is shared, whether or not the person sharing it meant to deceive.
- lateral reading
- Lateral reading means leaving a page to see what other trustworthy sources say about it and about who runs it.
- primary source
- A primary source is the original evidence or the body that first published the information, such as a law, a data table or an official notice.
Practise it for real
Reading is not the same as being able to do it. Complete these on your own computer, then tick only what you have actually done. These ticks are your own honest record: nothing checks them for you.
Check one claim sideways
Pick a claim you have seen on a website or in a forwarded message, for example a health tip. Write down the claim and the site name. Open a new tab and search for who runs the site, then search for the claim itself in plain words. Find one more source and note whether they agree.
Find the original
Find a news story that quotes a statistic. Without step-by-step help, trace the number back to the organisation that published it, and open that original page. Note the date of the original and whether the story described it accurately.
Knowledge check
6 questions. You need 80% to pass. Mistakes here are part of learning, and you can retry as often as you like.
Summary
- A good-looking page is not proof; check author, date, evidence and purpose.
- Lateral reading means leaving the page to see what others say about it.
- Go back to the primary or official source whenever you can.
- Compare at least two independent sources.
- Strong emotion is a signal to pause and check before sharing.
Checklist: can you do these?
Marking a lesson as read does not prove you can do it. Skills count as demonstrated when you pass the quiz (not yet) and complete the practical tasks (not yet).
Related lessons
References and further reading
Official sources for details that can change between versions.
- Stanford History Education Group: Civic Online Reasoning (Digital Inquiry Group)
- Ubuntu documentation (Canonical)
- Microsoft Support (Microsoft)