How To Consult Multiple Sources for the Most Complete Picture of a Story

The increase in fake news stories can make it difficult to discern facts from lies and propaganda. Most people are concerned about this issue, with 56% saying fake news related to the 2024 U.S. elections is a major concern. 

However, a majority of people find it challenging to differentiate between made-up and legitimate reporting. Only 23% of Americans are confident in their ability to spot fake news stories, with 38.2% admitting to unwittingly sharing fake reports with others. 

While finding reliable sources for news can help weed out false reporting, you need to ensure the news you share is true. One of the best ways to do this is to look at reporting from different sources to help confirm that the story is legitimate. It can also give you different perspectives of the event so that you can draw your own conclusions.

Finding news reports from different sources on the same subject is known as lateral reading. Lateral reading can reveal inaccurate or misleading stories quickly. You can immediately discount a story that other news outlets aren’t covering or that they are covering very differently.

Lateral reading can also show you how a publication leans. Researchers at the University of Rochester found that different wording and headlines affected the overall tone and ideological perspective of stories. For instance, more conservative outlets used terms like “abortion law” when discussing recent developments related to abortion, while terms like “abortion rights” were more common in liberal-leaning news organizations. 

Lateral reading allows you to account for these more subtle differences in reporting and form well-rounded conclusions based on facts and not emotions.

You can avoid reading fake news altogether by choosing credible news outlets. Legitimate news sources may have different reporting styles and ideological viewpoints, but they share these important qualities: 

• A history of quality reporting;
• Clearly identified sources of information;
• A well-defined editorial process;
• Efforts to be objective by presenting both sides of a story;
• A published policy for correcting errors. 

Identifying legitimate sources is an important part of news literacy. Studying editorial policies, ignoring sources that don’t publish an editorial policy, engaging in lateral reading, and looking at the sourcing within articles will help with this evaluation. 

Evaluating Source Reliability

In the era of fake news and bias, it’s easy to become cynical instead of having a healthy skepticism of news stories. Cynicism causes you to automatically write off an entire story as biased instead of looking for facts within it. A skeptical approach helps you assess the source and story using your evaluation steps before forming an opinion. 

Again, the source’s track record and reputation are important, but you should also examine the company or individual who owns the news outlet and any potential biases associated with this relationship. 

You can then move on to evaluate editorial policies and how well the story uses sources, quotes, and facts to support its main points to determine the source’s perspective.

As the University of Rochester study showed, legitimate news sources can offer different perspectives on the same story. Rather than discounting sources with subtle differences, you can use the reporting to help you understand the nuances of these different viewpoints. 

This process starts by defining the angle, ideology, and biases in the reporting. 

You can determine this by looking at the language and tone of the story, especially in the headlines and ledes, or first sentences, of the article. Also, consider the sources the journalists choose and how they present the facts. 

Here’s a closer look at how you assess a news story to define the perspective. 

Recognizing Language and Tone

Bias may be evident in the word choice, as the University of Rochester study demonstrated. Keep in mind that certain words automatically create an impression about the story and set a tone, regardless of the facts that follow. For example, 

language differences might include the use of words like “riot” instead of “protest” or terms like “victim” instead of “ex-con.” 

Comparing Headlines and Ledes

Readers will automatically form an opinion of the article based on the headline and the first few sentences of the story, known as the lede. You need to pay special attention to this part of a news story. Some sources, even those that produce legitimate reporting, may sensationalize headlines to get people to click on their stories to increase ad revenue. Other headlines and ledes may attempt to appeal to an audience’s ideology to attract more readers. 

An example of these differences could be an article about someone who was injured during an arrest. One headline might read “Local Man Victim of Police Brutality.” It could paint law enforcement negatively. The same story at a different outlet might be “Ex-Felon Hurt When Captured by Police.” This headline leads you to assume the man being arrested is the villain because it uses the word “ex-felon.” A third story could be titled “Man Injured in Police Custody.” This might be the least biased headline, but it leaves the door open for readers to form an opinion based on their current viewpoints.

Good news articles will present facts and support them with other information, such as research, quotes, or additional facts from other sources. It’s important to verify the facts to ensure the story is based on accurate information. 

Two ways to check facts are to cross-reference them by seeing if other sources have the same information and verifying that the facts quoted in the story are the same as they appear in the primary source, such as a research paper or study. 

Here’s a closer look at these fact-checking methods. 

Cross-Referencing Details

Cross-referencing is similar to lateral reading, but it focuses on specific details of the story rather than holistically comparing two news articles. For instance, you would see if two reports about the economy use the same figures for inflation, unemployment, or GDP. Or, you might compare the evidence or testimony two articles detail when covering an important court case. 

Regardless of the tone or wording of the articles, these basic facts should be consistent across all the articles on the topic. If there are inconsistencies, it could be a sign of potential bias or willful misinformation. 

Identifying Primary Sources

Primary sources are the people or organizations from which the information originated. Examples might include a government agency publishing data from a study or survey it conducted. Academic institutions or researchers can also serve as primary sources. Typically, their information is published in academic or trade journals, which are reputable because they’re peer-reviewed by experts in the field.

Often, journalists rely on official statements or interviews for their information. You can access this information or find a video or audio of the interview. The reason to do this is to ensure that the quote was used in the correct context. 

Academic studies and research are available from journals or the institutions that funded them, while most organizations have press offices that research official statements and publish them online.

Once you have good news sources, confirmed facts, and well-rounded sources from across the ideological spectrum, you can start to form an opinion. You may need to weigh the biases of each news source, find the facts and points that intersect in the stories from different sources, and use these common facts as the basis on which you can form your conclusion about the story. 

These facts may clash with your preexisting viewpoints on the topic, so you’ll also need to assess your own biases.

Avoiding Confirmation Bias

Confirmation bias is when you seek to confirm your existing viewpoints through news reports rather than trying to form an objective opinion. You may still focus on facts, but you select those that support your hypotheses and ignore or discount those that do not. 

To combat confirmation bias, you can hone critical thinking skills by actively seeking opposing viewpoints on the same story and objectively assessing their merits. Regularly reading publications with opposing viewpoints ensures you do not get stuck in an echo chamber with reporting that doesn’t challenge your current opinions.  

You can also adopt a falsification bias mindset, which involves seeking information that disproves your viewpoints. While this exercise may not change your mind, it may help you develop a more nuanced and balanced understanding of the issue.

Rather than heading to a single news source, you can create a news routine of checking several pre-vetted outlets each day. You can use a news aggregator that curates and fact-checks stories before sharing them with readers. Gathering your news sources intentionally also ensures you aren’t overloaded with low-quality reporting. 

If you carefully select sources and limit yourself to those that provide good information, you can get the facts and insights necessary to form well-informed viewpoints.