Behind the Facts 2025: Lessons of resilience and innovation from the frontlines of fact-checking
The year has been particularly turbulent for those working to uphold information integrity, as powerful voices have sought to undermine accuracy and trust.
At the same time, the funding environment has shifted in ways that directly affect the scale of work that organisations in the field can sustain. Traditional revenue streams continue to contract, while philanthropic support, long a cornerstone of public-interest journalism, is also under increasing pressure.
Despite the challenges, fact-checkers have remained committed to not only holding the line but deepening their mission, as our Behind the Facts podcast found while exploring how we protected information integrity in 2025.
Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn
From algorithm manipulation to climate narratives, here is what we learned from fact-checkers working across digital platforms, offline communities, conflict zones and climate-affected regions.
The year began with a critical examination of social media’s role in spreading misinformation. Saja Mortada of the Arab Fact-Checkers Network (AFCN) explained how social media platforms routinely amplify viral content regardless of its accuracy. This engagement-driven model means sensational claims frequently outperform verified information, creating conditions in which falsehoods spread faster than credible information can reach audiences.
“Even after major platforms reduced fact-checking partnerships, we continued developing new tools,” Mortada said. Her team built verification systems assisted by artificial intelligence (AI) and WhatsApp chatbots to reach audiences where they communicate most. These innovations emerged from necessity, as the weakening of traditional partnerships pushed fact-checkers to become more resourceful and collaborative.
The conversation highlighted resilience: that while algorithms change rapidly, fact-checkers are adapting just as quickly through innovation and regional collaboration. AFCN’s work shows that when institutional support falters, grassroots innovation and cross-border cooperation can help fill critical gaps in the information ecosystem.
Not every community has reliable internet access. As a result of this digital divide, millions of people remain vulnerable to false claims shared through traditional communication channels, often without correction or verification.
In Nigeria and Zimbabwe, fact-checkers have adapted by reaching people where misinformation spreads – through conversations, radio and word of mouth.
Catherine Adiniyi in Nigeria uses radio dramas in Pidgin English to weave fact-checking principles into daily routines, making verification relatable and engaging for local audiences.
In Zimbabwe, Chris Chinaka supports fact-checking clubs in schools and community spaces where young people can discuss information openly. This creates safe environments for critical thinking and peer-to-peer learning about media literacy.
These approaches show that effective fact-checking goes beyond technology. It depends on trust, cultural relevance and meeting communities on their own terms. The success of offline interventions challenges assumptions that fact-checking must be primarily digital. By working within existing communication networks, Adiniyi and Chinaka reach audiences who may never encounter a fact-checking website or social media post.
In Ethiopia and Sudan, fact-checkers such as Elias from Ethiopia Check and Remaz from Beam Reports face a different obstacle: not an overload of misinformation, but a lack of reliable information altogether. Government restrictions on public data mean they must verify claims using international datasets, local contacts, geolocation tools and fragmented sources. Fact-checking in this context becomes more investigative, piecing together the truth from scattered evidence while navigating political sensitivities and personal safety risks.
Working under these conditions demands both creativity and courage. When official statistics disappear or are inaccessible, fact-checkers must develop alternative approaches. These include cross-checking multiple international databases, building trusted local networks and using satellite imagery to verify visual claims. Each verification becomes far more time-consuming and complex than in countries with open access to data.
Their work reveals a fundamental principle: access to information is a right, not a privilege. When governments restrict public data, citizens lose the ability to make informed decisions about their lives. The persistence of Elias and Remaz shows that even in hostile information environments, dedicated fact-checkers can still provide vital accountability, often at considerable personal and professional risk.
Inside Nigeria’s Cable Network, Ebunoluwa Olafusi leads a fact-checking desk working at the fast pace of broadcast journalism, where interviews happen in real time and breaking stories demand immediate coverage. With journalism demanding minutes rather than hours, editors often have little time to verify claims before publication, making real-time fact-checking both essential and challenging.
Yet Olafusi has begun to see a shift. Politicians now preface their statements with the expectation they will be fact-checked. Viewers increasingly correct misinformation in comment sections. Newsrooms pause to verify claims before going on air. This cultural change did not happen overnight. It emerged through consistent, visible fact-checking that showed the consequences of sharing false claims and the value of getting it right.
“Fact-checking is redefining accountability from within established institutions,” Olafusi said. Her experience shows how verification practices can shape public discourse when embedded in mainstream media. Despite its challenges, newsroom-based fact-checking may be one of the most effective ways to shift information culture, combining institutional authority with journalistic credibility and broad audience reach.
Misinformation does not always originate locally. Researcher at Oslo Metropolitan University, Samba Badji, examined foreign information manipulation and interference, in which external actors spread narratives designed to inflame tensions or destabilise regions. These campaigns often exploit existing social divisions, using sophisticated tactics that make foreign-originated content appear local and credible.
Badji described a case in which misleading footage aired by Niger’s national broadcaster nearly triggered regional conflict in the Sahel. The incident illustrated how foreign manipulation can have real-world consequences, from heightened tensions to the risk of violence or diplomatic crises. He also noted that some local groups have since adopted these tactics for domestic purposes, creating a troubling feedback loop in which methods of external manipulation become normalised in local political communication.
Identifying such manipulation requires awareness, training and a strong commitment to responsible journalism. This conversation highlighted that misinformation operates within a broader geopolitical landscape, not merely as isolated local incidents. Badji’s research highlights the need for fact-checkers to understand not only what is false, but also who benefits from particular narratives and how information warfare tactics evolve across borders.
The year concluded with Lanre Olagunju, editor-in-chief of Check Climate Africa, who challenged dominant narratives about climate change in Africa. International coverage often frames the continent solely through the lens of crisis and victimhood, overlooking both the complexity of lived experiences and the innovative responses emerging from communities.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
“The dominant story presents Africa solely as a victim,” Olagunju said. “But we are missing the everyday realities and the innovation happening across the continent.”
He pointed to farmers adapting to shifting seasons, families travelling further to access water and schools disrupted by flooding. These examples show how climate change plays out in daily life, beyond the dramatic images that dominate international coverage.
Olagunju also highlighted solutions, from architects designing naturally cooled buildings and farmers adopting drought-resistant crops to communities innovating with limited resources. These stories of adaptation challenge narratives of helplessness. Olagunju’s perspective demonstrates how climate reporting can combine scientific accuracy with grounded optimism, presenting African communities as active agents shaping their own climate responses rather than as passive victims of change.
Across six episodes in 2025, the conversations we had on Behind the Facts reinforced a simple truth: defending accuracy requires intention, resilience and constant adaptation.
Every time you pause to verify information before sharing it, you help strengthen a culture of accuracy. From all of us at Behind the Facts, thank you for listening, questioning and engaging throughout the year.
We return in 2026 with new conversations and a renewed commitment to strengthening the integrity of our information landscape.
Truth does not defend itself. We do.