FactHub

FactHub auditor

First Look

A fast first-pass check that catches only obvious problems: a title the evidence doesn't back, plain contradictions, an unsupported rating, irrelevant sources, or missing common questions.

Audits articles 5 checks Version 1 1 run per audit Doesn't read sources anthropic/claude-haiku-5-5

Send feedback on this auditor

What it checks

  1. Title matches the evidence title-matches-evidence

    Does the title (and the claim, finding and answer) say roughly what the evidence items show, with no obvious overstatement, wrong direction, or numbers the evidence doesn't contain?

    5 findings

  2. No obvious contradictions no-obvious-contradictions

    Is the article free of plain contradictions, such as the finding disagreeing with the answer or conclusion, or two sections stating incompatible facts or numbers?

    13 findings · 2 applied

  3. Plausible justification plausible-justification

    Does the conclusion give a sensible, readable reason for the rating that a reasonable reader would accept from the evidence presented?

    2 findings · 1 applied

  4. Sources are relevant sources-relevant

    Is each cited source, judged by its name, title, description and role, plausibly about the topic and the claim it supports, rather than off-topic or obviously unsuitable?

    No findings yet

  5. Common questions answered common-questions

    Does the article have common questions (objections), and does each have a plausible response that actually addresses it?

    4 findings

Each check comes back as Pass, Concern (minor or material), Fail, Not applicable, or Not checked.

How it grades

The first rule that matches the check results gives the grade.

  1. Any check is Fail Something is plainly broken: the rating or title contradicts the article's own evidence, the sources are off-topic, or there are no common questions.
  2. 3 or more checks are Concern (material) Three or more obvious problems; the article is unreliable as written.
  3. 2 or more checks are Concern (material) Two obvious problems; the article needs a closer look.
  4. Any check is Concern (material) One obvious problem a reader would notice, such as a title the evidence doesn't back or a missing common question.
  5. Otherwise Passes the first look: nothing obviously wrong. Minor notes may be reported as feedback without lowering the grade.

From its instructions

A quick first pass that looks only for obvious problems a careful reader would spot at a glance: a title or rating the evidence doesn't back, plain contradictions between sections, a conclusion that gives no sensible reason for its rating, off-topic sources, and missing or dodged common questions. It defaults to Pass, ignores nitpicks and style, and leaves subtle reasoning, source accuracy and house style to the Skeptic, Source Checker and Standards auditors.

Recent audits

  1. Washington's school spending outpaced inflation as test results slipped. Version 3 · 5 of 5 checks passed · by auditor version 1
  2. Few I-645 news stories said no current budget relies on the tax Version 4 · 5 of 5 checks passed · by auditor version 1
  3. Ten payments supplied half of Washington's first-year capital gains tax. Version 4 · 5 of 5 checks passed · by auditor version 1
  4. Washington's top-earner income swings sharply, and its new tax has no reserve. Version 5 · 5 of 5 checks passed · by auditor version 1
  5. Washington's millionaires tax can reach households where no one earns $1 million. Version 6 · 5 of 5 checks passed · by auditor version 1

All audits →

Latest findings

  1. Key point 2 says the sentence was added after the August data, but the evidence only dates it to Sept 11-Oct 11.

    Open Minor check no-obvious-contradictions about article:i645-unemployment-tied-highest:4 (a draft when audited) 22 October 2026 by version 1

  2. Claim and evidence title say the state told two unions it can't afford 2027-29 raises; the SEIU 775 record shows only a proposed freeze.

    Open Minor check title-matches-evidence about article:i645-no-campaign-union-funding:4 (a draft when audited) 22 October 2026 by version 1

  3. Editorial note dates enactment to Oct 21, 2026; the session law was signed March 30, 2026.

    Open Minor check no-obvious-contradictions about article:wa-millionaires-tax-who-it-affects:5 (a draft when audited) 22 October 2026 by version 1

  4. Key point 2 and description say the sentence came after the August ranking, but the evidence only dates it to Sept 11-Oct 11.

    Open Minor check no-obvious-contradictions about article:i645-unemployment-tied-highest:3 (a draft when audited) 22 October 2026 by version 1

  5. 'National unions' is $1.7M in the evidence but $2.7M in the conclusion, and key point 6's $3.8M does not match the $4.0M remainder.

    Open Minor check no-obvious-contradictions about article:i645-no-campaign-union-funding:3 (a draft when audited) 22 October 2026 by version 1

All findings →