I 

 

The impact of independent fact-checking on journalism practice in South Africa  

 

A research project submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of 

Arts, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.  

 

Carina van Wyk 

1774698 

 

Supervisor: Bob Wekesa  

 

30 April 2021 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 
 

II 

 

Declaration  

 

I declare that this research report is my own unaided work. It is submitted for the degree of 

Master of Arts in Journalism and Media Studies at the University of the Witwatersrand, 

Johannesburg. It has not been submitted before for any other degree or examination or at any 

other university.  

 

 

 

Signed: Carina van Wyk  

 

Date: 30 April 2021 

 

  



 
 

III 

 

Acknowledgements 

 

First and foremost, I would like to thank my husband, Jannie Rykaart, for supporting and 

encouraging me all the way – from the first word to the last full stop of this research report, and 

everything in between.     

 

Thank you to my supervisor, Bob Wekesa, for your guidance.  

 

I would also like to extend my appreciation to all the editors who made time available in their 

busy schedules to be interviewed. Your insights proved invaluable.   



 
 

IV 

 

Contents 

Introduction 1 

1.1. The evolution of fact-checking 1 

1.2. Contextual background 5 

1.3. Rationale 6 

1.4. Research objectives 9 

1.5. Research questions 9 

1.6. Conclusion 10 

Literature review 11 

2.1. Introduction 11 

2.2. The challenges newsrooms are facing in the digital media environment and its impact on 

journalism practice 11 

2.3. The objectives of fact-checkers and how they assess their impact 14 

2.4. The relationship between fact-checkers and the media 17 

2.6. Conclusion 19 

Theoretical framework 21 

3.1. Introduction 21 

3.2. Changes in theory in a digital media environment 21 

3.3. The dynamics of theories and concepts related to journalism practice and 

professionalism 23 

3.4. Application of the evolving agenda-setting theory 24 

3.5. Examining the perceived impact of fact-checking within the “news ecosystem” 26 

3.6. Conclusion 27 

Methodology 28 

4.1. Introduction 28 

4.2. Data-collection method: semi-structured, in-depth interviews 29 

4.3. Sample selection and size 31 

4.4. Data-analysing method: thematic analysis 35 

4.5. Declaration from author 35 

4.6. Conclusion 35 

Presentation and analysis of findings 37 

5.1 Introduction 37 



 
 

V 

 

5.2. The impact of the growth in digital media on journalism practice and professionalism 37 

5.2.1. Moving from the traditional to the online media space: the impact on South African 

newsrooms and news coverage 37 

5.2.2. The link between changes in journalism practice due to the digital environment and 

the growth of independent fact-checking 38 

5.3. The impact of fact-checking on newsrooms and news coverage 40 

5.3.1. The impact of fact-checking on the news agenda and information ecosystem 40 

5.3.2. The impact of independent fact-checking on journalists’ work processes: how and 

what journalists report on 42 

5.3.3. Fact-checking in the fast-paced digital media environment 44 

5.4. The use of independently fact-checked content by journalists and the role it plays in 

promoting accuracy in the media 45 

5.4.1. Ways in which the media use the work of independent fact-checkers 46 

5.4.2. Independent fact-checking and accuracy 48 

5.5. Journalists’ perceptions of dedicated fact-checking and independent fact-checking 

organisations 49 

5.5.1. Moving towards defining the role of independent fact-checking within the field of 

journalism 50 

5.5.2. The media’s perceptions of independent fact-checkers 52 

5.6. Conclusion 56 

Discussion of findings 58 

6.1. Introduction 58 

6.2. To what extent is independent fact-checking considered to have an impact on South 

African newsrooms and news coverage, if at all? (RQ1) 58 

6.3. In what ways do the South African media make use of work done by independent fact-

checking organisations and to what extent does independent fact-checking promote accuracy 

in the media, if at all? (RQ2) 60 

6.4. How do journalists perceive the role of independent fact-checkers and their relationship 

with the media, and do they consider independent fact-checking a distinct form of journalism 

that is growing due to factors related to journalism practice in the digital media environment? 

(RQ3) 61 

6.5. Conclusion 64 

Conclusion 65 

Bibliography 68 

Addendum A: Declaration from the author  



 
 

VI 

 

Addendum B: Interview question guide  

Addendum C: Organisations represented by interviewees  

 

  



 
 

1 

 

Introduction 

 

With the practice of independent fact-checking growing worldwide and in Africa (Graves & 

Cherubini, 2016; Funke, 2019; Bell, 2019; Stencel & Luther; 2020b) this research examines its 

perceived impact on journalism practice in South Africa. The purpose of the study is to establish 

whether the work done by fact-checking organisations is considered to have an impact on 

journalism practice (and by extension practices in newsrooms and news coverage) in South 

Africa and, if so, to what extent. It also explores the relationship between independent fact-

checking organisations and the media, and how journalists perceive the practice of dedicated1 

fact-checking as practised by independent fact-checkers.  

 

Through this research I aim to contribute to the fairly limited research in the field of independent 

fact-checking, especially in South Africa. The study is all the more important as research on the 

influence of fact-checking on journalists and journalistic discourse is particularly scarce (Graves, 

Nyhan & Reifler, 2015; Cheruiyot & Ferrer-Conill, 2018:964). In light of the Covid-19 pandemic, 

which broke out shortly after the research started, and the subsequent spread of misleading and 

false information related to the disease (Ali, 2020; Van der Linden, Roozenbeek & Compton, 

2020; World Health Organization, 2020), establishing the possible impact of independent fact-

checking on newsrooms and news coverage – and thus on the information consumed by media 

audiences – is arguably more relevant than ever.     

 

1.1. The evolution of fact-checking  

As will be indicated in the discussions that follow, independent fact-checking is a fairly new 

phenomenon globally and in Africa, but fact-checking itself is not novel. It is therefore worthwhile 

charting its historical trajectory (see Figure 1) before returning to the South African context.  

 

In-house fact-checking has been around since at least 1923 when TIME magazine appointed a 

group of fact-checkers to verify the accuracy of information in articles prior to publication (Fabry, 

2017). However, the rise and growth of what Graves (2013:2) calls “dedicated” fact-checking, 

which refers to verifying claims that are already in the public domain, can be considered a 

mostly 21st-century phenomenon. The independent fact-checking site Snopes started 

 
1Since independent fact-checking organisations practice “dedicated fact-checking” as described by 
Graves (2013:2) the words “independent” and “dedicated” are used interchangeably in this study. 



 
 

2 

 

investigating “urban legends, hoaxes and folklore” in 1994 (Snopes, n.d.), while the first 

organisations dedicated to assessing “the truth of political claims” became operational in the 

United States of America (USA) in the early 2000s (Graves & Cherubini, 2016:6). Spinsanity, 

which was founded in 2001 and has since closed, is referred to by Graves (2013:125) as what 

“appears to have been” the USA’s “first dedicated fact-checking site”. Two years later 

FactCheck.org, based at the University of Pennsylvania, followed (Graves, 2013:126-127). 

FactCheck.org monitors the accuracy of statements by “major U.S. political players in the form 

of TV ads, debates, speeches, interviews and news releases” (FactCheck.org, n.d.).  

 

A blog by Channel 4 News in the United Kingdom (UK) that covered a parliamentary election in 

2005 seems to have been the first regular European “source of political fact-checking” (Graves 

& Cherubini, 2016:6). Since then the practice of fact-checking has spread across six continents. 

Along with newsroom pressures brought about by the growth of the internet and social media, 

which is discussed in detail in this study, and a rise in the spread of mis- and disinformation 

(Berger, 2018), came a steady increase in fact-checking projects and/or outlets worldwide (see 

Figure 2).  

 

The Duke Reporters’ Lab (The Lab), a centre for journalism research at Duke University with a 

core focus on fact-checking (Duke Reporters’ Lab. n.d.a.), has been tracking fact-checking 

projects2 around the world since 2014. To be listed, a project – which can refer to a fact-

checking outlet, a website or a fact-checking programme – has to regularly publish articles, 

videos or audio reports that “verify the accuracy of claims made by prominent public figures and 

institutions; debunk rumors, hoaxes and other forms of misinformation that spread online; or 

review the status of political promises made by candidates and political parties” (Adair & 

Stencel, 2016).  

 

The number of fact-checking projects on the database has been increasing steadily over the 

past seven years – showing especially rapid growth during the first half of 2020 “with elections, 

unrest and a global pandemic [Covid-19] generating a seemingly endless supply of falsehoods” 

(Stencel & Luther, 2020a).   

 
2 Duke Reporters’ Lab identifies individual fact-checking “projects” or places, including outlets, websites 

and programmes, where the public can find reliable fact-checking reports. Examples include country-
specific pages and projects produced by multinational fact-checking organisations, such as Africa Check. 
While the Reporters’ Lab counts each major satellite, the International Fact-Checking Network’s signatory 
list generally counts the overarching organisation (Adair & Stencel, 2016). 



 
 

3 

 

Figure 1: The evolution of fact-checking journalism  

 

  Sources: Referenced in section 1.1. 

 

Figure 2: The growth of dedicated fact-checking globally  

 

Sources: Duke Reporters’ Lab (Adair, 2014a; Stencel & Luther, 2019, 2020a, 2020b)  



 
 

4 

 

In April 2014, a total of 44 active fact-checking projects were counted by the Lab globally, a 

number that more than quadrupled in just more than five years to 188 in June 2019 (Stencel, 

2019). By October 2019 a total of 210 active fact-checking projects were counted in 68 

countries (Stencel & Luther, 2019) and a year later it surpassed the 300 mark for the first time 

with a total of 304 in 84 countries across six continents (Stencel & Luther, 2020b).   

 

The first independent fact-checking organisation in Africa, Africa Check, was launched in 

Johannesburg, South Africa, in 2012 and has since also opened offices in Dakar in Senegal, 

Lagos in Nigeria and Nairobi in Kenya (Africa Check, n.d.). Although Africa’s number of fact-

checking projects was still much lower than Europe’s 85, Asia’s 82, North America’s 72 and 

South America’s 40 (Stencel & Luther, 2020b) by October 2020, there are now 21 projects 

across the continent, which is five times more than the four listed by the Lab in February 2018 

(Stencel & Griffin, 2018). 

 

The Lab’s latest map of fact-checkers around the globe (Duke Reporter’s Lab, n.d.b.) shows 21 

fact-checking projects and/or outlets doing fact-checking across Africa. These are Africa Check 

in South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya and Senegal; AFP Fact Check in South Africa, Nigeria and 

Kenya; Dubawa in Nigeria and Ghana; Buharimeter and the International Centre for 

Investigative Reporting’s FactCheckHub in Nigeria; PesaCheck in Kenya, Uganda and 

Tanzania, ZimFact in Zimbabwe; Congo Check in the Democratic Republic of Congo; Namibia 

Fact Check in Namibia; GhanaFact in Ghana; and Matsda2sh (Don’t Believe), Saheeh Masr 

and Da Begad (Is This Real?) in Egypt. By December 2020 six of the organisations represented 

on the Lab’s map – Africa Check, AFP Fact Check, PesaCheck, GhanaFact, Congo Check and 

Dubawa – were also verified signatories of the code of principles of the International Fact-

Checking Network (IFCN) (Poynter, n.d.).  

 

In my capacity as head of education and training at Africa Check, I manage Africa Facts, an 

informal network of African fact-checkers and media organisations that are involved in fact-

checking activities (Africa Check, n.d.c.). Although Duke Reporters’ Lab and the IFCN’s official 

numbers are used in this research, it is valuable to note that at least five fact-checking outlets – 

TogoCheck (TogoCheck, n.d.) Vox Populi in Uganda (Vox Populi, n.d.), Ethiopia Check 

(Ethiopia Check, n.d.), Fasocheck (Fasocheck, n.d.) in Burkina Faso and MISACheck 

(MISACheck, n.d) in Mozambique – which joined the Africa Facts network in 2020 and 2021, 

were not yet featured on the Lab’s database at the time of the research. This means the official 

https://dabegad.com/
https://dabegad.com/
https://dabegad.com/


 
 

5 

 

count of fact-checking projects and organisations on the continent by the Lab will in all likelihood 

be higher soon.   

 

1.2. Contextual background 

For the purposes of this research, I will distinguish between fact-checking as an internal editing 

function in newsrooms before publication and dedicated fact-checking as practised by 

independent organisations, specifically to verify claims in the public domain, i.e. after 

publication. Fact-checking has a traditional meaning in journalism that refers to internal 

processes followed in order to verify facts prior to publication (Graves & Amazeen, 2019:1). 

Internal fact-checking, which prevents incorrect information from being published, is mainly 

concerned with whether a reporter quotes someone correctly and not whether the claim made 

by the person who’s quoted is true, while dedicated fact-checkers assess whether claims are 

factually correct or not (Graves, 2013:3). Graves and Amazeen (2019:1) also describe it as an 

“evidence-based analysis” of statements made by politicians and other public figures or 

published by the media in order to verify their accuracy. Dedicated fact-checking services also 

provide internet users with guidance in terms of the credibility of online content (Brandtzaeg, 

Følstad & Domínguez, 2017). Some fact-checking organisations who are signatories of the 

IFCN, verify and flag false social media content as part of Facebook’s Third Party Fact-

Checking Program, which was launched in late 2016 (Tardáguila, Funke & Benkelman, 2019) 

and by December 2020, was being worked on by more than 80 organisations in 60 languages 

(Full Fact, 2020).  

 

Some dedicated fact-checking outlets are affiliated to news organisations or based in 

newsrooms, especially in the USA (Stencel, 2019). Others are independent of media companies 

and often based at universities or within areas of civil society, usually aimed at better informing 

people and “promoting fact-based public discourse” (Graves & Amazeen, 2019:1). The need for 

dedicated fact-checking and the rapid growth within this field are widely attributed to the 

challenges the fast-paced digital media environment, with its quick turnaround times and short 

deadlines, brings (Cheruiyot & Ferrer-Conill, 2018:967; Graves & Amazeen, 2019:4). The 

public’s growing access to the internet and social media has escalated the challenges in the 

media environment with traditional journalists losing their dominance as gatekeepers in deciding 

what should be published as news, and information making it into the public domain irrespective 

of the media’s actions (Vos 2015:6).  

 



 
 

6 

 

These factors are all contributing to what has been referred to as “information disorder” (First 

Draft, n.d.), a “tidal wave of misinformation” (Amazeen, 2017b:2) and an “egregious rise in the 

extent of misinformation and disinformation available in the public domain” (Wekesa et al., 

2017:21). According to Seaton et al. (2020:578), Covid-19 has “revealed and accelerated an 

information crisis” and they further argue that fact-checking “sits within a far more complex and 

chaotic media context” than a decade ago and “its expertise and understanding has never been 

so important”. The World Health Organization (WHO) (2020:2) says the pandemic has been 

accompanied by an “infodemic”, which it describes as an “overabundance of information, some 

accurate and some not, that makes it hard for people to find trustworthy sources and reliable 

guidance when they need it”. This makes it difficult for the public to know how to “protect 

themselves and others, and help mitigate the impact of a disease”, which is “exacerbated by the 

global scale of the emergency, and propagated by the interconnected way that information is 

disseminated and consumed through social media platforms and other channels” (WHO, 

2020:2).  

 

One of the first studies about fact-checking in Africa, and more particularly South Africa, found 

that although fact-checking coverage gained traction over the five-year period from 2012 to 

2017, the South African media – in contrast to North America (Stencel, 2019) and western 

Europe (Graves & Cherubini, 2016:8) – in general were not practising dedicated fact-checking 

within newsrooms. There was a steady increase, however, in the publishing of fact-checking 

reports written by independent fact-checkers such as Africa Check (Wekesa et al., 2017:25).  

 

This research goes a step further and explores whether independent fact-checking is 

considered to have an impact on journalism practice and whether it improves the accuracy of 

news reporting in South Africa. This is done by a thematic analysis of qualitative semi-structured 

interviews with editors across a broad spectrum of news outlets in the country. In order to make 

sense of this new form of journalism, I will use a combination of theories and concepts in the 

field of journalism practice and professionalism (especially for new media), and the intermedia- 

and network agenda-setting theories.  

 

1.3. Rationale  

Having laid out the background and context to the study in terms of the evolution and key topics 

pertaining to fact-checking journalism, in this subsection I will explain the importance of the 

research.  



 
 

7 

 

 

As mentioned in section 1.1., dedicated fact-checking only started gaining traction in the USA in 

the early 2000s and was practised for the first time in South Africa and Africa in 2012, when 

Africa Check was launched, a mere nine years ago (Africa Check, n.d.). With this form of 

journalism being fairly new and rapidly growing (Stencel, 2019), the rationale for this study was 

not only to make a contribution to fact-checking research globally but even more so on a 

continent and in a country where it is – just like in the rest of the so-called global south – 

severely understudied when compared to North America and Europe (Van Wyk, 2016:3; 

Wekesa et al., 2017:21; Cheruiyot & Ferrer-Conill, 2018:972; Dias & Sippitt, 2020:605).  

 

Similar to Wekesa et al’s. study (2017), research investigating fact-checking coverage in a 

variety of newspapers with the highest circulations across the USA, suggested that although 

there’s been an increase in dedicated fact-checking or fact-checking coverage, these practices 

were mostly pursued by newspapers that have dedicated fact-checkers within their newsrooms 

(Graves et al., 2015:16). Graves et al. (2015:16,17) suggested further research across the news 

landscape – not only print, but also broadcast and online outlets – to validate the above findings 

and establish the effects of independent fact-checking on general political coverage, which is 

partly what this research will aim to do, but in the South African context and not on political 

news coverage only.  

 

The same study also suggests that the practice of dedicated fact-checking has a lot of potential 

to grow, and that the media is more receptive to fact-checking than what one might think when 

looking at their reporting (Graves et al., 2015:7), while a study about fact-checking and data-

driven journalism in Southern Africa indicates that there’s potential for independent fact-

checking “to slowly redefine how news is produced” (Cheruiyot & Ferrer-Conill, 2018:972). Both 

these studies suggest the need to investigate the impact of fact-checking on journalism practice.  

 

To further motivate the reasons for this study: despite academics referring to fact-checking as a 

journalism genre (Amazeen, Thorson, Muddiman & Graves, 2018:30) as well as an increase in 

literature examining the effect of fact-checking on the general public and the behaviour of 

politicians, globally research about the influence of fact-checking on journalists and journalistic 

discourse is scarce (Graves et al., 2015; Cheruiyot & Ferrer-Conill, 2018:964). Graves et al. 

(2015:16) found journalists interpret fact-checking in different ways, with some under the 

impression that it may refer specifically to stories that “formally research a specific claim by a 



 
 

8 

 

public figure” and others broadly understanding it as “any reporting which seems to challenge 

political rhetoric”. Wekesa et al.’s (2017:26) study also indicates a lack of understanding in 

some South African newsrooms about what fact-checking is and how it can be considered a 

specific journalistic genre.  

 

When taking into account the aforementioned factors – that independent fact-checking in Africa 

is new and fast-growing (Stencel, 2018), not well understood by journalists (Wekesa et al., 

2017:26), understudied (Van Wyk, 2016:3) and could have an impact on journalistic practice 

and how news is produced (Cheruiyot & Ferrer-Conill, 2018:972) – obtaining and providing 

knowledge in this field could prove invaluable for other researchers, media practitioners and 

fact-checking organisations, not only in South Africa and the rest of Africa but worldwide. It also 

contributes towards concepts in the field of journalism practice and professionalism by 

establishing whether the growth in independent fact-checking and the work done by such 

organisations are perceived to have an impact on the way journalists approach and write their 

stories.  

 

This research, to some extent, builds on Wekesa et al.’s (2017) study, which showed that the 

publishing of fact-checking findings by the South African media is increasing. Through the 

analysis of qualitative in-depth, semi-structured interviews with editors from a variety of news 

organisations, including online, print and broadcast, the study also aims to provide an in-depth 

look at the relationship between independent fact-checking and journalism, how fact-checking is 

perceived by journalists and whether the growth of fact-checking is considered to have an 

impact on the media and the accuracy of their news coverage. 

 

With the flood of false information accompanying the Covid-19 pandemic, I argue that research 

to determine the likely impact of independent fact-checking on journalism practice – and thus 

the information consumed by media audiences – is more necessary than ever. Democracies 

rely on “well-informed and politically educated citizens” (Turčilo & Obrenović, 2020), which 

means information disorders threaten democratic values and good governance by denying the 

public access to accurate information. Studying the “actual and potential impact” of fact-

checking as a way to counter misinformation could therefore lead to a better understanding of 

“the contribution that fact-checking can make to our democracies” (Dias and Sippitt, 2020:61).   

 



 
 

9 

 

Being the head of education and training at Africa Check, I am aware that my role at the fact-

checking organisation could introduce the potential of bias, but I believe that the value of 

research done in this field – especially in South Africa – by far surpasses the possible harm of 

bias (see Addendum A).  

 

In summary, a shortage in intellectual literature that investigates the actual and potential impact 

of dedicated fact-checking on journalism globally and in South Africa, the novelty and dynamic 

nature of fact-checking, and the contribution fact-checking can make to democracies clearly 

indicate the relevance of this study.  

 

1.4. Research objectives  

This research investigates whether the growth in independent fact-checking and the work of 

fact-checking organisations are considered to have an impact on journalism practice: what 

journalists report on and how accurately they report on it. Through semi-structured qualitative 

interviews with editors from a variety of South African media organisations, I gain insights into 

the relationship between fact-checking and journalism and how fact-checking is perceived by 

journalists. Ultimately, I aim to contribute to research in the fairly understudied and relatively 

new field of fact-checking.  

 

1.5. Research questions 

The research is guided by the following question: To what extent is independent fact-checking 

considered to have an impact on journalism practice in South Africa? In order to answer the 

above research question, the following sub-questions are included:  

 

RQ1: To what extent is independent fact-checking considered to have an impact on South 

African newsrooms and news coverage, if at all?  

 

RQ2: In what ways do the South African media make use of work done by independent fact-

checking organisations and to what extent does independent fact-checking promote accuracy in 

the media, if at all?  

 

RQ3: How do journalists perceive the role of independent fact-checkers and their relationship 

with the media, and do they consider independent fact-checking a distinct form of journalism 

that is growing due to factors related to journalism practice in the digital media environment? 



 
 

10 

 

 

1.6. Conclusion  

In section 1, I provided background on the growth of the practice of independent fact-checking 

worldwide, explained the rationale for undertaking the research, discussed the aims of the study 

and set out the research questions. The next section will cover literature applicable to the study.  

 

  



 
 

11 

 

Literature review  

 

2.1. Introduction  

Literature covering the following themes are relevant to this research: the challenges 

newsrooms are facing in the digital media environment and its impact on journalism practice, 

the objectives of fact-checkers and how they assess their impact, the relationship between fact-

checkers and the media, and the growth of dedicated fact-checking as a new form of journalism. 

 

2.2. The challenges newsrooms are facing in the digital media environment and its 

impact on journalism practice  

As will be discussed in this section, a key challenge that newsrooms face globally is job losses 

due to the digital revolution, a drop in advertising income and the subsequent economic 

pressure on business models. These job losses have an impact on the quality of journalism, 

which is linked to the core of the study, fact-checking journalism.    

 

It is estimated that newsroom employment across the newspaper, radio, broadcast television, 

cable television, and digital-native3 sectors in the United States declined by almost a quarter 

from 2008 to 2019, amounting to about 27 000 job losses (Grieco, 2020). Not surprisingly, 

newspapers were hit the hardest, in 2019 employing only half the number of journalists they did 

11 years before (Grieco, 2020). Came 2020 and the Covid-19 pandemic and the situation 

became more dire with scores of newsrooms across the country either closing, laying off or 

furloughing employees, or cutting salaries (Hare, 2021). 

 

In South Africa, it is estimated that the “professional journalist workforce” in the country, which is 

believed to have been around 10 000-strong in 2008, was “slashed in half” in the decade 

leading up to the publication of the State of the Newsroom 2018 report by Wits University, with 

many of the job cuts affecting senior, experienced journalists (Daniels, 2018:18). The School of 

Journalism and Media Studies at Rhodes University found that revenues of what is often 

referred to as the “mainstream media” are continuing to decline sharply as digital technologies 

and social media platforms are “attracting audiences away from local content and rapidly 

reducing income for news organisations” (Dugmore, 2018:2). A report by the university further 

 
3 News sites that started as digital only as opposed to those that started as broadcast or paper-based 
publications: https://www.waldenu.edu/online-bachelors-programs/bs-in-communication/resource/what-is-
digital-native-media  

https://www.waldenu.edu/online-bachelors-programs/bs-in-communication/resource/what-is-digital-native-media
https://www.waldenu.edu/online-bachelors-programs/bs-in-communication/resource/what-is-digital-native-media


 
 

12 

 

states that “newspaper and print magazine circulations, which have been dropping steadily 

since about 2007, were now plummeting” while the slight increase in online news consumption 

is not enough to counteract the declining income of legacy news operations “and some of the 

lost legacy audience is not showing up online” (Dugmore, 2018:3). Findlay, Bird & Smith (2018) 

found that South African media organisations struggle to earn the income they used to through 

print publications in an online space.  

 

The State of the Newsroom 2019-20 report painted yet another bleak picture of restructuring 

and job losses, which, according to Krüger (2020:4) illustrates the “deep crisis facing the 

traditional business model of journalism”. Not surprisingly, in 2019 newspaper circulation further 

declined, accompanied by warnings of more possible job cuts at Independent Media and Mail & 

Guardian, and retrenchments and salary freezes at Tiso Blackstar (Finlay, 2020:7-8). Tiso 

Blackstar has since sold its news assets to Lebashe Investment Group that now houses titles 

such as Sunday Times, TimesLIVE, Business Day, BusinessLIVE, Sowetan and SowetanLIVE 

under Arena Holdings (TimesLIVE, 2019).   

 

Covid-19 lockdown restrictions, first announced on 23 March 2020, and its severe economic 

impact, accelerated the challenges that the South African media are experiencing with declining 

advertising income, the closure of several print publications, further job losses and a threat of 

widespread retrenchments (SANEF Management Committee, 2020:3). According to an interim 

report on the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on journalism published by the South African 

National Editors’ Forum (SANEF), “print media consumption has been devastated” and even 

though broadcasters and online platforms have experienced a “dramatic uptake in their 

production of news as citizens seek sources of trustworthy, credible information in the time of 

uncertainty”, difficulties faced by the media industry have intensified (Rumney, R, 2020:11).  

 

Not surprisingly, job losses have had a huge impact on journalists’ work processes and the 

quality of journalism globally. Due to economic pressures, news organisations have had to start 

sharing content and, because of the decline in staff in American, Canadian and UK newsrooms, 

fewer reporters now have more work to do, with changes not only in terms of covering more 

news events, but also in how they are covered in these “converged newsrooms” (Compton & 

Benedetti, 2010:494). The journalists who remain are “required to post to the Internet, collect 

audio and video clips, shoot digital photographs, post updates to blogs and most recently, 

update live to Twitter” (Compton & Benedetti, 2010:494-495). 



 
 

13 

 

South African media is no exception when it comes to changes and challenges in newsrooms. 

The State of the Newsroom 2017 newsroom survey found that the majority of employees at the 

media organisations surveyed4 had fewer than 15 years’ experience (Otter & Grant, 2017:28-47) 

and that staff at some media companies – who used to work exclusively for one news title – 

were now creating content for “content hubs”, which was then distributed among different titles, 

meaning the same content “is likely to be published by a number of titles in the group” (Otter & 

Grant, 2017:30). Economic pressure has had a domino effect, leading to a shortage of mentors 

to upskill young journalists, the demise of beat journalism – which used to allow journalists to 

specialise in a specific field – (Daniels, 2018; Jordaan, 2019) and therefore a lack of in-depth 

reporting (Findlay et al., 2018).  

 

However, it is not only economic pressure and job losses that prove challenging in the online 

space. With social media providing a platform for inaccurate information to spread widely 

(Dijkstra et al., 2018:1; Wardle & Derakhshan, 2018:49) and journalists using social media as a 

news source (Thomas, 2013; Findlay et al., 2018), they arguably run a greater risk of publishing 

or broadcasting information that is factually incorrect than when interviewing trusted contacts 

and experts in a specific field. Findlay et al. (2018) found that South African journalists can’t fulfil 

their gatekeeping role to the extent that is necessary as they don’t have time to adequately 

“fact-check and do justice to stories”. One could further argue that a reduction in data costs 

(Goldstuck, 2020; Khumalo & Van der Merwe, 2020; Malinga, 2020) could lead to an increase in 

social media usage and exacerbate the spread of false information. 

 

Findlay et al. (2018) describe the impact of social media and digital technology on South African 

newsrooms as follows:  

One of the most striking changes indicated in the shift [to digital] is the huge and 

unrelenting pressure on journalists. This stems not only from the fact that there are 

simply fewer journalists (because of the failing economic models and rampant 

retrenchments in the sector), but also because of the increased expectations of 

individual journalists to churn out multiple stories in a quicker turn-around time with more 

than just written copy (multimedia content, etc.). They are also now expected to keep 

 
4 Data was obtained from 25 print titles and 16 online titles published by Independent Media, Media24 

and M&G Media, and five independent publishers – the AmaBhungane Centre for Investigative 

Journalism, Daily Maverick, GroundUp, The Daily Vox and Health-e News.  

 



 
 

14 

 

tabs on an ever-increasing volume of potential content through platforms like social 

media ... This has critical implications for the quality of reporting being undertaken. 

 

It is against this backdrop of challenges that the aims of this study include to establish whether 

journalists perceive fact-checking to be a form of journalism that is necessitated by factors 

related to changes in journalism practice in the digital media environment. 

   

2.3. The objectives of fact-checkers and how they assess their impact 

As we investigate the possible impact of independent fact-checking on journalism practice in 

South Africa, it is valuable to look at what fact-checkers’ objectives are. A study about fact-

checking and data-driven journalism in sub-Saharan Africa, indicated that the aims of non-profit 

fact-checkers are a combination of, on the one hand, traditional normative journalistic goals, for 

example, informing the public, seeking truth and verifying the accuracy of information, and, on 

the other, attempts to create and establish data-driven tools that “change the ways in which 

news organisations operate and how users access data” (Cheruiyot & Ferrer-Conill, 2018:972).  

 

To bring us closer to understanding their aims and how they assess their impact, let’s consider 

how the two fact-checking organisations with offices in South Africa – Africa Check and AFP 

Fact Check – set out their roles and functions. Africa Check describes itself as a “non-partisan 

organisation that exists to promote accuracy and honesty in public debate and the media in 

Africa” (Africa Check, n.d.b.), its ultimate goal being to “strengthen democracy, foster engaged 

citizenship and improve life outcomes” (Africa Check, n.d.a.). The organisation also debunks 

“dangerous false statements” on social media platforms, including WhatsApp (Africa’s first 

independent fact-checking organisation, 2021; Africa Check, n.d.d.; What’s Crap on 

WhatsApp?, 2021). AFP Fact Check, the digital verification service of the Agence France-

Presse (AFP) news service, which has a bureau in Johannesburg, monitors online content to 

“investigate and disprove false information, focusing on items which can be harmful, impactful 

and manipulative” (AFP Fact Check, n.d.). Both these organisations have been verifying the 

accuracy of Facebook content through the social media platform’s third-party fact-checking 

programme since 2018 (Rawlins, 2018).    

 

Although I found that fact-checking research that specifically refers to or is based on media or 

other academic theory is fairly limited, looking at the above-mentioned finding of Cheruiyot & 

Ferrer-Conill (2018:972), one could argue that the objectives of fact-checkers span across a 



 
 

15 

 

broad spectrum of journalism theory – dating back more than a century, with the normative 

theories marking the first journalism studies in the early 1900s, up to the latest theory applicable 

to the digital media environment and the changes it brought about.  

 

The normative theories of the press looked at the ideal views of the role the media should play 

in society and how these functions are affected by the freedom of, and restrictions on, the media 

(Fourie, 2001:269). In a study of three non-profit fact-checking organisations “outside the well-

studied media environments of North America and Europe” (Van Wyk, 2017:2), it was found that 

all of them – Chequeado in Argentina, FactChecker in India and Africa Check – fulfilled at least 

three functions of the social responsibility theory through their work (Van Wyk, 2017:91). These 

functions were enlightening society, providing the public with information to facilitate and further 

accurate debate, and keeping governments to account (Van Wyk, 2017:91).  

 

In research that examines journalists’ motivations for doing fact-checking, Graves et al. 

(2016:106) describes fact-checking as “one of the most significant innovations in journalistic 

practice in recent years” becoming popular among journalists in the United States, with the 

majority of print and broadcast news organisations doing some form of fact-checking. They 

found that the practice of fact-checking is on the rise mainly because it “appeals to the 

professional values and status concerns of journalists” (Graves et al., 2016:121). In the USA, 

fact-checking has been embraced by leading news organisations such as the New York Times, 

while PolitiFact won the Pulitzer Prize for its coverage of the 2008 election, “a clear signal of the 

new genre’s embrace by journalistic elites” (Graves et al., 2016:107). In 2007 PolitiFact started 

as an election project of Florida’s largest daily newspaper, the Tampa Bay Times (then the St. 

Petersburg Times), rating the accuracy of certain statements made by politicians. Direct 

ownership of PolitiFact was transferred to the Poynter Institute for Media Studies in 2018 to 

allow it to function as a not-for-profit news organisation (Drobnic Holan, 2019).  

 

Until now, research has mainly been focused on the “short-term, persuasive effects” of fact-

checking on people’s beliefs (Dias & Sippitt, 2020:605), which doesn’t provide a clear picture of 

what fact-checkers consider the impact of their work to be. According to fact-checking 

organisations Africa Check, Chequeado in Argentina and Full Fact in the United Kingdom, there 

is value in publishing fact-checking reports as they might reach influential audiences of other 

journalists and policy makers using fact-checkers’ work, and they raise awareness among 

governments, the media and pressure groups that they might be fact-checked, but they believe 



 
 

16 

 

publishing fact-checking reports is not enough (Africa Check, Chequeado & Full Fact, 2019). 

These organisations thus seek corrections on the record and encourage people who were found 

to have shared inaccurate information not to do so again. If a statement is found to be incorrect, 

unproven or misleading, Africa Check contacts the source of the claim, presents them with the 

evidence that led to the finding and requests that the source amends the claim in line with 

certain recommendations (Africa Check, n.d.d.). Dias & Sippitt (2020:609) state, however, that 

it’s not yet clear how such actions affect the “future behaviour” of politicians and journalists.   

 

Graves and Amazeen (2019:8) suggest considering the “potential impact” of fact-checking not 

only on individual attitudes and the behaviour of public officials but also on journalistic practice, 

as the effects on journalists are not clear (Graves et al., 2015:1). Graves et al. (2015:1) suggest 

that fact-checkers could help to provide clarity on factual disputes, making it more likely that 

public figures who repeat falsehoods might be challenged by the media while “the increasing 

use of the format across the profession may encourage other reporters to question political 

claims in their own coverage”. This has indeed happened in countries like the USA where media 

organisations like CNN and The Washington Post have journalists practising fact-checking 

themselves (CNN, n.d; The Washington Post, n.d.). 

 

The actual impact of fact-checking on the media could be even more difficult to determine than 

its impact on politicians’ behaviour (Mantzarlis, 2015). Mantzarlis (2015) suggests that the 

“uptake of practices that are specific to fact-checking” rather than only the coverage of fact-

checking by the media, should be used as an indicator of the impact of fact-checking. 

Brandtzaeg et al. (2017:114) suggests that the effectiveness of fact-checking and verification 

depends on whether these services help users reach their goals, whether they are perceived to 

be necessary, whether they increase users’ job performance and enable them to “discern 

factual information from other online content”.  

 

A research study commissioned by Africa Check to determine the awareness of and impact of 

the organisation’s work in Nigeria found that Africa Check needs to improve its visibility and 

create more awareness around its work in order to increase its impact on public debate in the 

country (Amobi, 2019:33). The findings further suggested a need to “spread the word of Africa 

Check’s activities on new and traditional media” and indicated that none of the interviewees 

became aware of Africa Check through traditional media platforms (Amobi, 2019:36). 

 



 
 

17 

 

In this subsection, the objectives of fact-checkers were elaborated on. These objectives include 

promoting accuracy in public debate and the media. In the next section I will discuss the 

relationship between independent fact-checkers and the media.  

 

2.4. The relationship between fact-checkers and the media 

In order to assess the possible impact of independent fact-checkers on journalists’ work 

processes and news coverage, it is worthwhile to investigate the relationship between the two 

parties – a relationship that could be considered quite complex. On the one hand, fact-checkers 

depend on traditional newsrooms to publicise their work for a wider reach, while, on the other, 

they often criticise work done by the media and consider it to be an institution in need of change 

(Graves & Cherubini, 2016:6).  

 

Graves et al. (2015:16) describe the value each of the two parties can derive from the other as 

follows:    

In some instances, fact-checkers can help to create a consensus on factual disputes, 

making it more likely that elites who repeat falsehoods on issues ranging from vaccine 

risks to birth certificates will be challenged by other journalists. Widespread coverage of 

fact-checkers’ conclusions also helps to increase the number of people who are exposed 

to corrective information, widening its audience beyond the relatively few who make the 

effort to visit fact-checking sites. 

 

In a qualitative evaluation of Africa Check’s work5, commissioned by the Poynter Institute, 

interviewees whose work had been fact-checked responded to it in different ways, with two 

saying Africa Check did not properly take into account the resource, skills and capacity 

shortages within newsrooms when fact-checking news content (Finlay, 2016:7). Some 

journalists also felt that the media should not be held accountable for inaccuracies in “third-party 

content” such as media releases and that Africa Check should take into consideration that 

content is created to “achieve a particular effect in audiences” (Finlay, 2016:7). Although 

interviewees in general didn’t agree on whether or not Africa Check had a clear impact on public 

conversation, two interviewees said that it did have an effect “on the way their organisations 

 
5  It is important to note that representatives from media organisations only made up about a quarter of 
the sample size. There were 26 interviewees, of which seven were Africa Check staff, and the rest a mix 
of representatives from research organisations, the health sector, media (online, print and 
columnists/public commentators) and the development/civil society sector (Finlay 2016:3).   



 
 

18 

 

worked, influencing their editorial decisions and producing a sense of caution when working with 

statistics” (Finlay, 2016:7).  

 

According to a study by Kubheka (2017:19), the work done by Africa Check has encouraged 

newsrooms to take fact-checking seriously – both because of the training the organisation does 

in newsrooms and the possible embarrassment should an article be found to contain information 

that is not correct. One of her interviewees, former fact-checker Ina Skosana, who once worked 

for the Mail & Guardian, described how embarrassed the paper was to have a story rated as 

“incorrect” by Africa Check, and “quickly improved its internal processes” (Kubheka 2017:19). 

More research that would cast light on why fact-checking is gaining traction in some media 

organisations and not in others, has also been suggested (Graves et al., 2016:121). 

 

2.5. The growth of dedicated fact-checking as a new form of journalism  

One of the major pursuits of this study is to examine the status of fact-checking as a 

professional journalistic practice and hence I look at whether it is considered a distinct form of 

journalism.  

 

Although using different descriptions of the practice, several academics agree that fact-checking 

is a journalistic genre (Graves, 2013:1; Amazeen et al., 2018:30; Juneström, 2020). Journalistic 

genres are described as “sustainable groups of published items with common conceptual and 

formal attributes” (Serdali, Ashirbekovab, Orazbekulya & Abiev, 2016:1079).  

 

In 2014, Tim Franklin, then president of the Poynter Institute journalism school in St. 

Petersburg, Florida, referred to fact-checking as a “new form of accountability journalism” vital to 

democracies worldwide (Adair, 2014b). This point of view is shared by Luengo & García-Marín 

(2020:405,411) in light of a “post-truth discursive context in which the importance of facts and 

scientific evidence is diminished to assert ideological positions”, highlighted by the spread of 

Covid-19-related misinformation. Graves (2013:15) describes it as a type of “annotative” 

journalism that “assembles news out of other stories, addresses gaps in those stories, and is 

designed in myriad ways to be incorporated into future stories”. 

 

The study also examines whether the practice of fact-checking came about and is growing due 

to factors related to journalism practice in the digital media environment. This environment, with 

its quick turnaround times and increased deadline pressures (Cheruiyot & Ferrer-Conill, 



 
 

19 

 

2018:967; Graves & Amazeen, 2019:4), as well as the media losing their dominance as 

gatekeepers (Vos, 2015:6) has led to the continuous spread of false information in the public 

domain (Wekesa et al., 2017:21). Amazeen (2017a:5) states that the spread of fact-checking 

internationally appears to be a reform effort to address the deterioration of journalism standards, 

while it may also “be understood as a democracy-building tool that emerges where democratic 

institutions are perceived to be weak or are under threat” (Amazeen, 2017b:1). Graves 

(2013:291) refers to fact-checkers as “a new species in the media ecosystem” and argues that 

the work done by “these new journalistic actors” offers insights into the “systemic changes in the 

news media”.  

 

South African newsrooms, in contrast to the USA, haven’t embraced dedicated fact-checking 

journalism similar to that done by fact-checking organisations, but are mostly republishing these 

organisations’ reports. Drawing from the results of a study by Wekesa et al. (2017:23) on the 

prevalence of fact-checking reporting, this research is pinned on the premise that the coverage 

of fact-checking findings by the South African media has increased since 2012. Wekesa et al.’s 

(2017:23) research, which was based on coverage of fact-checking organisations’ work across 

nine online news platforms showed an increase in the publication of the number of articles 

related to fact-checking from 0 in 2012, 29 in 2013 to 50 in 2016 and 68 from January to 

September 2017.  

 

It should be noted, however, that the vast majority of the articles (235 out of 277, or almost 

85%) published from 2013 to September 2017 were “wholly based” on the reports of Africa 

Check (219) or other fact-checking organisations (16), mostly the American news organisation 

Associated Press (Wekesa et al., 2017:24,25). Only seven content items (two by Daily 

Maverick, two by Mail & Guardian and three by News24) were found to have relied “wholly on 

the news organisation’s own verification methods”, while the rest were mostly items where 

Africa Check was referred to “in one way or another” (Wekesa et al., 2017:25). This study will 

further examine how the media uses or draws from the work of independent fact-checking 

organisations.  

 

2.6. Conclusion 

In this section, literature pertaining to dedicated fact-checking was discussed. I covered the 

challenges experienced by newsrooms in the digital environment and its impact on journalism 

practice, the objectives of fact-checkers and how they assess their impact, fact-checking 



 
 

20 

 

coverage by the South African media, the relationship between fact-checkers and the media 

and the growth of dedicated fact-checking as a new form of journalism. In section 3, the theories 

and concepts that form the basis of the research will be examined.  

 

  



 
 

21 

 

Theoretical framework 

 

3.1. Introduction  

Different to internal pre-publication fact-checking, which has been around for almost a century 

(Silverman, 2007:275), dedicated fact-checking is such a new phenomenon that media scholars 

are still grappling with its theoretical and conceptual interpretation and, according to Bannikov & 

Sokolova (2018), there is not a commonly agreed academic definition that “characterise[s] the 

role of a fact-checker within the journalism system”. The various ways in which the practice of 

fact-checking is described by academics, as examined earlier, confirms this.  

 

I use a combination of concepts and theories related to the field of journalism practice and 

professionalism, as well as the intermedia- and network agenda-setting theories as framework 

for the research – first, to gain a better understanding of this new type of journalism and how it 

came about and, second, to contribute to research about factors that influence changes in 

journalistic practice. 

  

The following subsections cover four aspects outlining the theoretical framework of this study: 

changes in media theory within a changing media environment, the dynamics of theories and 

concepts related to journalism practice and professionalism, the evolving agenda-setting theory, 

and drawing on these theories and concepts as a means of answering the research questions.     

 

3.2. Changes in theory in a digital media environment  

In a changing media environment (Kammerl & Kramer, 2016; Daniller, Allen, Tallevi & Mutz, 

2017), the objectives of dedicated fact-checking seem to add a new nuance to journalism and 

the growth of the practice provides an opportunity for new conceptual approaches. This 

suggests that media theories have to be enhanced if we are to understand the impact of fact-

checking on journalism. Journalism has an evolving nature due to “conflicts emerging from the 

social context in which it operates” (Breit, 2004:81), which is evident when looking at the growth 

of dedicated fact-checking in response to challenges given rise to by the internet as discussed 

earlier.  

 

As early as 2001, South African academic Pieter Fourie (2001:252,253) suggested that the 

concept “network society” be used to describe the new media environment brought about by the 

growth in information and communication technology and the subsequent worldwide 



 
 

22 

 

“interconnection between people, groups, nations, and so on”. Five years before the advent of 

social media platforms such as Facebook (Barr, 2018) and Twitter (“We look back …”, 2016) in 

2006, and 11 years before the practice of dedicated independent fact-checking started in South 

Africa in 2012, Fourie (2001:260) warned that the impact of “the Internet on public 

communications is increasingly also becoming an area of investigation and concern”. One could 

argue that the emergence and growth of social media platforms over the past 15 years could 

only have exacerbated Fourie’s concerns, and for the purposes of the study it would be valuable 

to investigate the link between not only online news, but also information shared on social 

media, and the growth of dedicated fact-checking. This is evident when considering the growth 

in the amount of fact-checking that is done on posts shared on platforms such as Facebook and 

WhatsApp (Facebook, 2021; What’s Crap on WhatsApp?, 2021).  

 

More recently, the term “news ecosystem” has been used in journalism studies to focus on the 

players that influence the news narrative and the ways in which news circulates via different 

technologies (Wiard, 2019:1). Wiard (2019:2) argues that “putting journalism processes in boxes 

prevents us from fully grasping the diversity of actors and practices that make up the news” and 

social networking sites are driving researchers “to address how these ecosystems influence 

news production”. Add to this that the use of the word “network” as well as keywords related to 

“ecosystems” and “landscapes” has increased significantly in journalism studies in recent years 

(Ahva & Steensen, 2019:48) and it becomes clear that one cannot look at media theories with 

only print and broadcast, and even online, news media in mind – one has to consider as many 

factors as possible within the news and information ecosystem.     

 

As pointed out in section 2.3, fact-checkers’ objectives relate to a broad spectrum of journalism 

theory, from the normative theories of the early 1900s to the latest theory applicable to the 

digital media space. Although some older media theories are still relevant in the media today, as 

indicated by Van Wyk (2017:91,92), who found that Africa Check fulfilled four functions of the 

social responsibility theory, new media technologies are changing journalism practice 

(Obalanlege, 2015:1) and digitisation forces us to reassess the theories with which we try to 

understand journalism (Steensen & Ahva, 2015:1). According to Ahva & Steensen (2019:39) 

there’s a “need to rebuild our fundamental understanding of what journalism is, owing to the 

many changes mostly related to digitalization that have affected the profession and its practices 

since the turn of the millennium”, which is also when the practice of dedicated fact-checking 

began, suggesting a link between digitisation and this new form of journalism.    



 
 

23 

 

 

3.3. The dynamics of theories and concepts related to journalism practice and 

professionalism  

Over the years, many media theories, such as the normative theories of the press, as well as 

the gatekeeping and agenda-setting theories, have contributed to the conceptual field of 

journalism practice and professionalism in different ways. The normative theories of the press 

looked at the ideal views of the role the media was considered to play in society and how these 

functions are affected by the freedom of, and restrictions on, the media (Fourie, 2001:269). 

Normative journalistic roles, including acting as a watchdog holding governments to account, 

often refer to what journalists ought to do to contribute to the “proper workings of democracy” 

(Hanitzsch, 2017:4). 

 

Touching on professionalism, is the observation of Graves et al. (2016:121) that fact-checking in 

the USA is gaining popularity among the media mainly because it “appeals to the professional 

values and status concerns” of journalists. Different to South Africa, dedicated fact-checking is 

not only practised by independent fact-checkers but also embraced by leading news 

organisations. Dedicating fact-checking services such as PolitiFact, FactCheck.org and the 

Washington Post’s “Fact Checker” column have become “established voices in national political 

discourse, cited frequently by news outlets” (Graves, 2013:4). PolitiFact, which started as an 

election project of the Tampa Bay Times (then the St. Petersburg Times) and won a Pulitzer 

Prize for fact-checking more than 750 political claims during the 2008 US presidential campaign 

(Adair, 2019), is now functioning as a not-for-profit news organisation (Drobnic Holan, 2019). 

The award was described as “the most unusual, and most important, Pulitzer Prize” of that year, 

indicating that online databases, such as that of PolitiFact, were “rapidly becoming one of the 

important tools of watchdog journalism in the digital age” (“PolitiFact is most …”, 2009).  

 

In order to assess the possible impact of dedicated fact-checking on newsrooms and news 

coverage, it’s important to consider the workflow and news production processes in newsrooms 

in the digital era as described in section 2.2. A study covering newsrooms in South Africa, 

Zimbabwe and Kenya showed a “remarkable shift in news production processes and cultures” 

associated with a reliance on social media for story ideas and dissemination of news on multiple 

platforms (Moyo, Mare & Matsilele, 2019:503). 

 



 
 

24 

 

Arguably one of the biggest challenges for journalism practice and professionalism, and a 

possible reason why the US journalists referred to above consider dedicated fact-checking a 

practice that represents professional journalistic values, is the loss of the media’s traditional 

roles as gatekeepers and agenda setters in determining what the news of the day is going to be 

(Brooks, 2018; Gene, 2017) due to the internet and social media platforms. Gatekeeping refers 

to how information goes through a series of checkpoints [journalists] before being published or 

broadcast as news content (Oosthuizen 2001:196). Shoemaker and Vos (2009:1) describe 

gatekeeping as “culling and crafting countless bits of information into the limited number of 

messages that reach people each day”. 

  

The new online news and social media environment, with its overabundance of information and 

subsequent impact on newsrooms and news coverage as discussed in section 2.2, calls for the 

new conception of journalistic professionalism. Ramaker, Van der Stoep & Deuze describe the 

professional practice of journalism as “increasingly precarious and complex” as journalists 

encounter multiple constraints accelerated by technological and economic pressures 

(2015:345). Job losses within the media sector, as discussed earlier, is one of the severe 

consequences of these pressures, leading to even more precariousness within the industry.  

The term “professionalism” implies characteristics such as “autonomy, exclusive knowledge, 

ethical codes of conduct, occupational ideals or culture, and altruistic features (i.e., to act in the 

public interest) and jointly, these values function as a framework for journalists in everyday 

practice” (Wiik 2019:1). Today journalism’s identity is existentially shaken (Hanitzsch, 2017:2) 

and journalists’ professional status is questioned as “exclusivity is broken, autonomy declines, 

and other actors are increasingly redefining the field. In this context, new methods and ideals 

arise” (Wiik 2019:1). Ramaker et al. (2015:345) call for so-called “reflective practices” – where 

journalists reflect on the way in which they do their work – that should fit within the “precarious 

professional environment of contemporary news production”.  

 

As I examine the perceived impact of independent fact-checking on journalists’ news coverage 

and work processes, and on accuracy in the media, I also look at whether newsroom practices 

are becoming more reflective or not.  

 

3.4. Application of the evolving agenda-setting theory 

The agenda-setting theory is a good example of a media theory that has had to evolve with the 

rise of digital media and in its new forms can be applied to studies on the impact of fact-



 
 

25 

 

checking journalism, which can also be considered a response to the challenges the online 

environment has brought along as discussed in section 2.5.  

 

Historically, the agenda-setting theory was about shaping public opinion through the topics 

presented to media audiences and the way in which they were presented (Fourie 2001:304). 

This played a role in how significant the public perceived certain issues to be (McQuail 

2005:512) as media audiences tend to assess the importance of a topic based on the emphasis 

placed on it by the media (McCombs, 2011:1). However, while the mainstream media used to 

hold what could be considered a monopoly on setting the news agenda (Boynton & Richardson 

2016:1918), journalists’ decisions about what to report on are now often guided by content 

shared on social media platforms (Kushin, 2010:147; Moyo et al., 2019:503). Another factor 

contributing to journalism not being as dominant in setting the agenda and leading public debate 

as it used to be, is that the media often cover what their audiences seem to prefer based on 

online audience analysis (Moyo et al., 2019:502-503).  

 

Today, the agenda-setting theory includes several facets, such as the network agenda-setting 

(NAS) model (McCombs, Shaw & Weaver, 2014:782) and what used to be known as the theory 

of news diffusion, which is now called intermedia agenda-setting (McCombs, Shaw & Weaver, 

2006:61). These theories, which look at the impact of the “networked media agenda” on the 

“networked public agenda” (McCombs, Shaw & Weaver, 2014:782), could prove valuable in 

assessing the relationship between independent fact-checkers and the South African media, 

and whether fact-checkers are perceived to have an impact on news coverage and hence the 

“public agenda”.  

 

An analysis of the online media landscape in the USA from 2014 to 2016 suggested that fact-

checkers didn’t play a role “in predicting the agenda of news media overall” (Vargo et al. 2017). 

Luengo & García‐Marín (2020:410) state that fact-checking usually doesn’t set the agenda as it 

is done in reaction to what others have said. However, when taking into account how the 

agenda-setting theory has expanded beyond the impact of the mass media on the public 

agenda (McCombs & Shaw, 2006:59) and that it is now also used to investigate the role of 

social science, communication and journalism subfields in shaping the news agenda (McCombs 

& Shaw, 2006:60), I argue that it would be valuable exploring whether fact-checking plays such 

a role in the South African context.  

 



 
 

26 

 

Intermedia agenda setting provides a framework for analysing “how the media discuss issues 

that have already made the agenda” (Ahva & Steensen, 2019:45), which is essentially what 

fact-checking journalism does as it investigates the accuracy of information that is already in the 

public domain (How we fact-check [Africa Check], 2021). According to Graves (2013:9), 

intermedia links and effects should be understood “as the question of how different news 

organizations, genres, and media technologies or platforms interrelate and interact at different 

moments in media history,” referring to the example of a network news producer who would go 

through the day’s newspapers in the morning to see which news events are covered (Graves 

2013:10). In this study, I use the intermedia agenda-setting theory as a basis to investigate the 

intermedia links between the media and fact-checking organisations by assessing their level of 

interaction and how the work of journalists and that of fact-checkers interrelate.   

 

The NAS model adds to traditional agenda-setting theory by measuring not only how an issue is 

covered by a news organisation at a certain stage, but also how often certain issues are 

reported on simultaneously during certain times and what the relationships between these 

different news stories are (Vargo, C.J., Guo, L. & Amazeen, A., 2018:2030). Research done by 

Vargo et al. (2018:2030) found that the “network relationships among different news items and 

messages can be transferred between varied stakeholder agendas: from media to public, from 

different interest groups to media, as well as from media to media”. Graves et al. (2015:17) use 

the example of cable news networks that use research done by fact-checkers to produce video 

segments in which political claims are debunked as a way in which fact-checking spreads in 

“today’s news ecosystem”. Similarly, in this research the NAS model is used as a basis to 

establish whether the South African media also use research done by dedicated fact-checkers 

in their reporting.  

 

3.5. Examining the perceived impact of fact-checking within the “news ecosystem”  

As mentioned in section 3.2., the growth of independent fact-checking within the evolving field of 

journalism provides an opportunity for developing new conceptual approaches. In order to 

answer the research questions, one has to consider several factors within the news ecosystem. 

I therefore aim to interpret the perceived impact of fact-checking within the so-called “network 

society” or “news ecosystem” by drawing on concepts and theories related to journalistic 

practice and professionalism, and the intermedia- and network agenda-setting theories. 

 



 
 

27 

 

The agenda-setting theory has evolved in line with journalism practice in a digital media 

environment to now include the concepts of intermedia- and network agenda setting, which are 

used to examine the impact of the “networked media agenda” on the “networked public agenda” 

(McCombs, Shaw & Weaver, 2014:782). These theories are used to not only assess the 

relationship between independent fact-checkers and the South African media but also how the 

work of journalists and that of fact-checkers interrelate and therefore in which ways the media 

use fact-checking work in their coverage. These results will then, once again, touch on changes 

in journalism practice and professionalism.  

 

3.6. Conclusion 

In this section, I covered the evolving media theories that form the basis of the research. These 

include several theories and concepts pertaining to journalism practice and professionalism as 

well as the evolving agenda-setting theory within an expanding media network or ecosystem. In 

section 4, I will explain how I will incorporate the theoretical framework into my research 

methodology.   

 

 

  



 
 

28 

 

Methodology 

  

4.1. Introduction 

This study seeks to establish the perceived impact of independent fact-checking on journalism 

practice in South Africa by finding answers to the following questions:  

 

RQ1: To what extent is independent fact-checking considered to have an impact on South 

African newsrooms and news coverage, if at all?  

 

RQ2: In what ways do the South African media make use of work done by independent fact-

checking organisations and to what extent does independent fact-checking promote accuracy in 

the media, if at all?   

 

RQ3: How do journalists perceive the role of independent fact-checkers and their relationship 

with the media, and do they consider independent fact-checking a distinct form of journalism 

that is growing due to factors related to journalism practice in the digital media environment? 

 

In this section, I start moving toward the empirical dimension of the study by explaining how I 

will collect and subsequently analyse data. Taking into account that I am using concepts related 

to journalism practice and professionalism, including variants of the agenda-setting theory, as 

reference for answering the research questions and contributing to fact-checking research, I 

found a qualitative approach to be more suited than a quantitative one.  

 

The theoretical subfield of journalistic professionalism and practice is more inclined towards 

qualitative than quantitative methods, as illustrated in studies that share similarities with this 

research, such as the use of semi-structured interviews by Borges-Rey (2016) to look at data 

journalism practice in professional newsrooms and a similar approach followed by Kurambayev 

& Issenov (2020) to examine obstacles in journalism professionalism for aspiring journalists.  

In fact, journalism practice and qualitative research methods are closely linked in that both have 

a strong focus on observation and in-depth interviewing when gathering information, sceptical 

interpretation of this information, and providing perspective when explaining findings (Iorio, 

2011:7). 

   



 
 

29 

 

In probing intermedia- and network agenda-setting related to the circulation of news items 

between independent fact-checkers and selected media, my objective was not to quantitatively 

demonstrate the level of uptake but to indicate the extent to which there is an uptake. Therefore, 

although some researchers who explore the intermedia- and network agenda-setting theories 

use a quantitative approach (Vargo & Guo, 2016; Nygaard, 2020), I chose a qualitative 

approach because of the incorporation of journalistic professionalism and practice as mentioned 

above.  

 

Qualitative methods have also successfully been used in exploring evolving agenda-setting 

theories (Rogstad, 2016; Geiß, 2019), while several studies in the field of fact-checking 

approach the topic from a qualitative rather than quantitative approach, too (Cheruiyot & Ferrer-

Conill, 2018; Van Wyk, 2017). While quantitative research is defined as being “primarily based 

on measurement rather than on description”, qualitative research is mostly based on description 

instead of measurement (Bertrand & Hughes, 2005:260). It is important to note that one of the 

limitations of the study is that the impact of independent fact-checking on journalism practice is 

not measurable. A descriptive interpretation of the information I gathered through in-depth 

qualitative interviews is thus used to assess the perceived impact thereof.  

 

Furthermore, qualitative research’s best value lies in “achieving in-depth understanding of social 

reality in a specific context” (Lindlof and Taylor, 2011:109), which is vital in gaining insights into 

the day-to-day news coverage of journalists, the conditions they work under and whether 

independent fact-checking plays a role in the way they work – all of which tie in with the 

exploration of factors related to journalism practice and professionalism.   

 

4.2. Data-collection method: semi-structured, in-depth interviews 

Qualitative research methods for collecting data include observations, interviews, written 

reports, elicitation techniques and mapping, which can be further divided into subcategories 

(Given, 2008:2). Observation is a way of gathering data by observing and spending time with 

people within their environments and produce written accounts of their activities (Wästerfors, 

2018), elicitation is used to establish how groups of people organise the ways in which they 

understand the world, and mapping is a continuous activity for researchers who investigate 

changes and continuities within specific settings over time (Given, 2008). Since research of 

journalistic professionalism in the wake of the rise of fact-checking journalism is a work in 

progress, and little is known about the extent of its actual or possible impact on journalism 



 
 

30 

 

practice within the newsroom environment, I deemed neither observation nor elicitation or 

mapping to be suitable methods for research on the topic.  

 

In order to explore the perceived impact of fact-checking in detail and discover patterns of 

similarity and difference based on journalists’ individual experience, beliefs and behaviour 

(Given, 2008:5), I opted for in-depth interviews with editors from a variety of platforms and 

media organisations across the South African media landscape. Semi-structured interviews, 

which lie between strictly structured interviews with a set of questions requiring specific answers 

and an open-ended interview that takes the form of an in-depth discussion (Blaxter, Hughes & 

Tight, 2010:193), were used.  

 

A researcher who conducts semi-structured interviews has more freedom than one opting for a 

structured one as the interviewer does not have to strictly follow a detailed interview guide 

(Kajornboon, 2004:6). For example, the guide used for semi-structured interviews may consist 

of “carefully worded questions or a list of topics to be covered” based on the research 

question/s, and interviewers can decide if they want to follow the questions “to the letter” and in 

a specific order, or move between topics based on the interviewee’s responses (Ayres, 

2012:811). 

 

Corbetta (2003:271) states that, “Within each topic, the interviewer is free to conduct the 

conversation as he thinks fit, to ask the questions he deems appropriate in the words he 

considers best, to give explanations and ask for clarification if the answer is not clear, to prompt 

the respondent to elucidate further if necessary, and to establish his own style of conversation.” 

The interviewer decides how detailed the interview guide should be – whether a checklist of 

topics to cover, or a list of questions supplying the interviewer with guidelines – giving both the 

researcher and the interview ample freedom in terms of the discussion, while ensuring all the 

necessary themes are covered and information collected (Corbetta, 2003:271).  

 

The interviews used in this study comprised broad, in-depth questions (Addendum B) 

encouraging detailed answers based on topics related to the research questions in order to gain 

in-depth insights into current journalism practice in newsrooms, the interconnectedness of 

different news platforms and how that ties in with the evolving agenda-setting theory, and where 

and how independent fact-checking comes into play in this environment.  



 
 

31 

 

The wording of the questions was adjusted where necessary based on the flow of the interview 

as well as the type of media platform interviewees work on as online platforms often publish 

fact-checking reports as is (Wekesa et al., 2017), print publications might publish an entire 

report or make reference to findings by a fact-checking organisation, and radio and TV 

broadcasters would interview independent fact-checkers (Mwiti, 2020).  

 

Where the interviewer deemed it necessary, follow-up questions were asked as they are 

valuable to clarify an answer, get an explanation for or examples of a response, or to double-

check whether an answer is correctly understood (Du Plooy, 2002:144). Follow-up questions 

can also “elicit underlying ideas, feelings, sentiments and suggestions” the researcher might not 

have been aware of (Du Plooy, 2002:143).  

 

With the exception of the first interview, all of them were conducted online due to Covid-19-

related lockdown regulations and precautions, as even the least strict level 1 regulations stated 

that one should travel to “perform and acquire services only where such services cannot be 

provided from the safety of one’s home” (Department of Health, South Africa, 2020). Since 

interviewees are in an environment they know and are familiar with during an online interview, 

they might feel more at ease sharing their opinions, while other advantages include that there’s 

a reduction in time as well as costs related to the process (Bolderston, 2012:72-73). 

Disadvantages include possible technical issues such as unclear sound and a lack of visual 

quality (Bolderston, 2012:73), which I addressed during the interviews by asking interviewees to 

repeat answers that weren’t clear.     

 

All interviews were recorded and transcribed6 before the thematic analysis was conducted.   

 

4.3. Sample selection and size  

In the case of random sampling, all members of a population have an equal chance of being 

selected, but when doing qualitative research one’s goal is not often to interpret findings based 

on information from an entire population (Lindlof & Taylor, 2011:109), which is why one should 

sample deliberately and not at random (Moser & Korstjens, 2016). Although qualitative 

researchers might be interested in how often something happens, most of them choose to do 

“purposeful” or “purposive sampling”, making “informed judgements about what to observe or 

whom to interview” (Lindlof & Taylor, 2011:109,110). Although one of the disadvantages of 

 
6 Transcripts available on request. 

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375091


 
 

32 

 

purposive sampling is an “inability to generalize research findings”, it is effective when “only 

limited numbers of people can serve as primary data sources due to the nature of research 

design” (Dudovskiy, 2019) as in the case of this research. 

 

After doing a study about the uptake of fact-checking reporting in the newsrooms of US 

newspapers, similar to the one by Wekesa et al. (2017) done based on South African news 

websites, Graves et al. (2015:16,17) suggested further research across the media landscape – 

including print, online and broadcast outlets – to establish the effects of independent fact-

checking on news coverage. While I included interviews with journalists across all three of these 

types of media platforms, I also bore in mind Bertrand and Hughes’ suggestion to select “a 

population relevant to the question being asked, small enough to be practically manageable and 

large enough to provide the sort of data you need” (2005:64). 

  

I initially proposed interviews with a variety of about 15 journalists, including reporters, 

subeditors, news editors, editors and producers from various platforms. As I started contacting 

media organisations and journalists with interview requests, however, I found that in the majority 

of cases, editors were the most suitable interviewees for purposes of the research as they were 

more likely able to provide a broader overview of their editorial teams’ news-gathering practices 

as well as the content on their platforms. Based on this finding, as well as my knowledge in the 

fact-checking field, the final sample was a purposive selection of a variety of news, online, 

managing and associate editors.    

 

The limited time and willingness of some editors to take part in interviews due to their added 

workload in covering Covid-19 and adapting their work processes to keep staff safe, had an 

impact on the size and composition of the final research sample as well as the time period over 

which the interviews took place, as editors weren’t as readily available for interviews as initially 

expected. I realise the size of the research population makes it difficult to generalise the findings 

across newsrooms in South Africa. The study, however, doesn’t look at the impact of 

independent fact-checking on journalism practice in a conclusive manner by aiming to measure 

it, but in a manner that provides qualitative interpretive insights into the perceived impact 

thereof. I am, however, confident that the final sample of 13 editors was as representative of the 

country’s media landscape (see Figure 3) as possible and large enough for data-collection 

purposes, while still practically manageable for the purposes of the research in line with 

Bertrand and Hughes’ recommendations (2005:64). When I became aware of the challenges of 



 
 

33 

 

getting interviews completely in line with my initial planned sample in my research proposal, I 

moved my main focus to interviewing at least one editor from a wide variety of well-known 

media organisations in the country.  

 

This approach worked well since it’s become common over the past few years for media houses 

to have the same staff creating content for several titles and platforms within the same company 

in what is often referred to as content or subbing “hubs” (Otter & Grant 2017:30; Daniels 

2018:19). This meant that one interviewee often had insights into the content and work 

processes of more than one publication, news website, or TV or radio station. However, in 

cases where it became clear that the digital departments of certain organisations might use the 

work done by independent fact-checking organisations differently to their traditional platforms, 

online editors were contacted for clarification to ensure that the results reflect the reality within 

newsrooms. The findings can thus serve as a solid basis for future research in the field of fact-

checking journalism.   

 

Figure 3: A helicopter view of the South African media landscape  

 

Source: Rumney (2020:5) 

 

The approach followed ensured a varied sample, especially in terms of media ownership, while 

the different media formats (print, online, radio and TV) were all still represented. The interviews 



 
 

34 

 

led to valuable insights and a comprehensive overview of journalism practice and whether 

independent fact-checking is considered to have an impact within different media environments 

and organisations – all with fairly large audiences. The organisations represented by the 

interviewees include privately, state-owned and funded media; a variety of talk and music radio 

stations; free-to-air TV news as well as 24-hour subscription TV news channels; a daily and 

weekly newspaper; and several of the most popular online news platforms in terms of unique 

South African browsers.  

 

When taking into account the South African media landscape as depicted in Figure 3, the 

research sample (Addendum C) not only represented editors from the public and commercial 

sectors, but also from a variety of different platforms within these sectors. In the public sector, 

interviewees included editors at both SABC Radio News and SABC TV News. In the 

commercial space, the so-called “Big 4” traditionally print, but now also online, media 

companies are all represented: Media24 (News24), Arena Holdings (Sunday Times, Sunday 

Times Daily, TimesLIVE, Sowetan and SowetanLIVE), Caxton (The Citizen) and Independent 

Media (a weekend title). In terms of commercial TV stations, editors from free-to-air eTV News 

as well as the paid-for 24-hour channel, Newzroom Afrika, that is broadcast on DStv, were 

interviewed, while in terms of radio an editor from Eyewitness News (EWN), which covers news 

for two talk and two music stations owned by Primedia, was interviewed. All interviewees have 

between 10 and 32 years of experience working in the media industry.  

 

I specifically included the independent investigative newspaper Mail & Guardian and its online 

platform (mg.co.za) as well as investigative news platform Daily Maverick, which “is gaining 

much social prestige and respect among the news-consuming elite” (Ndlovu, 2015:127), since 

Wekesa et al.’s study (2017:23,24) indicated that these two online platforms published more 

content related to fact-checking from 2012 to 2017 than seven other online platforms covered in 

their research.  

 

For purposes of the research, I distinguish between dedicated fact-checking reporting as 

referring to the assessment of the accuracy of statements in the public domain (Graves, 2013:2; 

Africa Check, 2021) and internal fact-checking quality-control measures within newsrooms such 

as sub-editing and the verification of claims before publication (Graves & Amazeen, 2019:1). 

This was explained to each interviewee to ensure clarity of what is being referred to in the 

questions.  



 
 

35 

 

 

4.4. Data-analysing method: thematic analysis 

With thematic analysis, researchers look for “recognizable recurring topics, ideas, or patterns 

(themes) occurring within the data”, a method often chosen when “investigating a phenomenon 

for which little prior understanding exists” (Hawkins, 2018:2), which made it ideal for researching 

the perceived impact of independent fact-checking on journalism practice in South Africa, a 

topic very little research has been done on as far as I could establish. Since thematic analysis is 

known for its flexibility, it’s ideal to uncover “issues, problems, similarities and differences” in the 

field of communication (Hawkins, 2018:2), but I also kept in mind that in qualitative content 

analysis, such as thematic analysis, text is “open to subjective interpretation, reflects multiple 

meanings, and is context dependent” (Julien, 2012:122).   

 

Keeping the literature review and theoretical framework in mind, I followed a thematic analysis 

approach to analyse the information obtained during the in-depth interviews. With the ultimate 

aim of answering the research questions, I first organised the interview transcripts by question 

and then switched to a thematic strategy where I used colour codes to mark and organise 

themes based on recurring statements that started emerging (Wallace Knowledge Center, 

Workbook E).  

 

4.5. Declaration from author  

Being head of education and training at Africa Check, I was aware that my role at the fact-

checking organisation could introduce the potential of bias (see Addendum A). I believe that the 

value of this research, however, by far surpassed the possible harm of bias. My insider 

knowledge of the fact-checking industry proved invaluable as I could easily gain access to 

information related to Africa Check and other fact-checking organisations, which added depth to 

the research. Prior to each interview, I informed the interviewee that I work for Africa Check but 

that the research was conducted in my personal capacity as a master’s degree student and 

researcher with an interest in fact-checking. I encouraged all interviewees to be frank about 

Africa Check and its work throughout the interview process.  

 

4.6. Conclusion 

Section 4 covered and motivated the research methodology used in the study: the data-

collection and analysing methods, the sample size and selection process. Data was largely 

collected through semi-structured, in-depth interviews with a variety of editors across the South 



 
 

36 

 

African media landscape. This was followed by a thematic content analysis of the interviews. In 

section 5, the research findings will be presented in line with the research questions and 

recurring themes that were identified.   

 

 

  



 
 

37 

 

Presentation and analysis of findings 

 

5.1 Introduction  

In this section the information gathered by means of the in-depth qualitative interviews is 

presented and analysed in four categories, namely: the impact of the growth in digital media on 

journalism practice and professionalism; the impact of fact-checking on newsrooms and news 

coverage; the use of independently fact-checked content by journalists and the role it plays in 

promoting accuracy in the media; and journalists’ perceptions of dedicated fact-checking and 

independent fact-checking organisations. In each of the categories, information is presented 

and analysed in line with both the interview questions and themes that emerged during the 

course of the interviews. 

 

5.2. The impact of the growth in digital media on journalism practice and professionalism  

 

5.2.1. Moving from the traditional to the online media space: the impact on South African 

newsrooms and news coverage 

All interviewees indicated that the growth in digital media has had a substantial impact on 

newsrooms and news coverage, with more than half attributing changes in news coverage to 

social media specifically. It emerged that most journalists are now either covering news for both 

traditional and online platforms, or print and broadcast journalists work closely together with 

digital teams. 

 

To summarise the interviewees’ overall description of newsrooms at this point in time: fewer 

journalists, who are often junior, have to do more work at a faster pace than before, leading to a 

lack of depth in news coverage. The interviewees attributed this situation in newsrooms to 

several factors. First, the media have to keep up with a constant flow of news not only on news 

websites but also on social media platforms, accelerating the pace that journalists have to work 

at.  

 

There are no more deadlines, literally. It's a deadline, like, every minute, you've got to 

make sure you're on top of things, you're getting things out. (Interviewee 2, News24)    

 

Social media has given the people their power back … Members of the public are 

actually our chief editors, because when you wake up in the morning they have already 



 
 

38 

 

set the agenda for you in terms of what they think you should be discussing on your 

platforms or what they think they want to hear today or see on TV. (Interviewee 13, 

SABC TV News)  

 

Second, according to the interviewees, a drop in circulation and advertising income has led to 

the retrenchment of mostly experienced staff members, and thus smaller and so-called 

“juniorised” newsrooms. Third, due to the time pressures that these small newsrooms are under, 

there’s little opportunity for journalists to spesialise or build a network of contacts in a specific 

field.  

 

The basics of journalism is reliance on trusted sources of information. Nobody's going to 

trust you if they don't know you; if they don't know what you have done over time ... and 

that actually is one of the greatest, you know, tragedies that we're looking at … We 

expect very, very junior people to do some of the most complex of stories. (Interviewee 

8, Sowetan and SowetanLIVE) 

 

These findings confirm the changes in news production processes and the challenges 

newsrooms are facing in the digital media environment discussed in the literature review.  

 

5.2.2. The link between changes in journalism practice due to the digital environment and 

the growth of independent fact-checking 

The vast majority of interviewees thought there is a link between journalism practice in the fast-

paced, high-pressure digital media environment they experience in their daily work and the 

growth of independent fact-checking, but even more so between the rise of social media and the 

need for fact-checking. Speaking to the normative journalistic goals of seeking truth and 

informing the public, discussed in section 2.3, they believe fact-checkers have more time than 

journalists for fact-checking and verifying information in order to seek the truth, something that is 

especially challenging due to the plethora of content that’s available online.  

 

I think there is a lot of nonsense that's around that needs to be debunked, and your 

online and traditional newsrooms don't have the capacity to do so … and independent 

fact-checking organisations play a vital role in doing that. (Interviewee 4, Daily Maverick)  

 



 
 

39 

 

Sadly, sometimes that journalistic ideal of truth, the North Star if you will, is sort of 

obscured by this firehose of information and we're constantly playing catch-up, trying to 

be on top of the latest information. The consequence there is that we [journalists] are not 

always able to properly fact-check stuff. (Interviewee 9, Newzroom Afrika)   

 

Several interviewees touched on the role fact-checkers play in providing accurate information 

and improving the quality of journalism.  

 

… If you think about lack of resources in the newsroom, lack of specialisation, lack of 

depth of skills and, you know, knowledge and loss of institutional memory, it would have 

been very difficult without some [fact-checking] organisations being able to play in that 

space and actually close the gap. (Interviewee 8, Sowetan and SowetanLIVE)  

 

I think that sort of horrible time of journalism [when traditional media just started 

providing news on online platforms] where we [the media in general] were just chasing 

what audiences think is relevant and not doing as much quality journalism alarmed 

enough people that you ended up with independent fact-checking organisations and 

non-profit journalism centres and all of those things, which are saying we actually do 

need quality journalism that is fact-checked. (Interviewee 6, Mail & Guardian) 

 

Almost half of the interviewees also attributed the growth of independent fact-checking to the 

spread of false information via social media and other online sources, while at least three 

believe that the amount of false information spreading on social media plays a far bigger role in 

creating a need for fact-checking than changes in the media industry and information on news 

websites.  

 

I think the 24-hour broadcast cycle – Monday to Sunday – the websites, the social media 

have definitely led to the establishment and the creation and the rise of independent 

fact-checkers. But probably more due to social media where everyone can tweet what 

they like, say what they like, you've got the bots, you've got anonymous people ... 

(Interviewee 7, SABC Radio News)  

 

  



 
 

40 

 

5.3. The impact of fact-checking on newsrooms and news coverage  

 

5.3.1. The impact of fact-checking on the news agenda and information ecosystem  

With independent fact-checking practised for the first time in the country less than a decade ago 

and all the challenges in newsrooms brought about by digitalisation, it’s not surprising that 

interviewees’ thoughts on whether the work of fact-checking organisations have an impact on 

the news agenda in South Africa in any way varied substantially.  

 

Only four of the 13 editors thought independent fact-checking has an impact on the news 

agenda. Three of the four interviewees who did think so, indicated that this impact is fairly 

limited. 

 

I think there is an impact, because when fact-checking has been done often it forms part 

of news bulletins. EWN, I think, does them quite often. Whenever Africa Check does 

debunk something, there's normally a news piece. It's more the fast-news organisations 

that pick up on those trends, whereas for us it influences the depth of the story rather 

than a story in itself. (Interviewee 4, Daily Maverick)  

 

I do think that that [independent fact-checking] has an impact on how things are put 

across eventually …  sometimes, like I say, something’s been fact-checked and it's 

changed the whole … way that the story was initially put out. (Interviewee 2, News24)  

 

The majority of editors were unsure about whether fact-checking has an impact on the news 

agenda, while three interviewees believe it doesn’t have an impact on the news agenda in 

South Africa. These answers could be considered a reflection of findings in an analysis of the 

online media landscape in the USA, which indicated that fact-checking typically doesn’t set the 

agenda as it is done in reaction to statements that have already been made (Luengo & García‐

Marín (2020:410). 

 

However, some interviewees touched on the impact fact-checking could have by changing the 

coverage of an item that is already on the news agenda or the direction in which a story is 

heading. This corresponds with the intermedia agenda-setting theory that looks at “how the 

media discuss issues that have already made the agenda” (Ahva & Steensen, 2019:45).  

 



 
 

41 

 

If the news was about XYZ said ABC and suddenly a fact-checking organisation can 

come along and say, ‘Well, hold on, actually, this is not true’, then that affects the news 

agenda and that gives journalists a different avenue to follow that they may not 

necessarily have had time to research themselves. So certainly, I think it can have a 

huge effect … (Interviewee 9, Newzroom Afrika)  

 

Two editors referred to the role that fact-checkers play in the information ecosystem, in adding 

to the conversation and keeping the narrative within the so-called “information ecosystem” 

accurate. This confirms my earlier argument that one cannot look at media theories with only 

print and broadcast, and even online, news media in mind – one has to consider as many 

factors as possible within the ecosystem of information.  

 

The kind of stuff they [fact-checkers] check, you can say, ‘Okay, just take a step 

backwards ... just because a thousand people say it's so doesn't mean it's so, here's 

something credible that says it isn't, so actually put that into the mix’. I'm not sure if it's 

the news agenda so much but it's definitely a really important part of giving citizens 

information that's useful. (Interviewee 11, Sunday Times, Sunday Times Daily and 

TimesLIVE)  

 

Throughout the interviews several references were made to the bigger impact that interviewees 

thought fact-checking has in the USA when compared to South Africa – mostly based on their 

observations while following and covering that country’s presidential election in 2020.   

 

“I think it's in huge public interest ... that you have somebody who can actually point to 

inaccuracies and falsehoods that are being peddled. I've seen it in the US and I think it 

works fantastic. The likes of New York Times do that. I mean, Trump