Redefining objectivity: Exploring types of evidence by fact-checkers in four European countries

Fact-checking journalism challenges procedural norms of objectivity by providing truth verdicts. By actively evaluating statements and online rumors based on evidence weight, fact-checkers aim for robust, scientific objectivity. Despite this trend, there is a lack of studies analyzing evidence types used in verification articles, a gap which this article seeks to address. This comparative research examines types of valid evidence—documentation, digital forensic tools, and statements—employed by fact-checkers across 12 organizations in the UK, Germany, Portugal, and Spain ( n = 1976). Results are interpreted using media systems and digital indicators. Notably, Spain, with high political polarization and social media use for news, heavily utilizes digital forensic elements. Germany and the UK, known for high journalistic professionalism and low epistemic vulnerability, predominantly feature ‘all-inclusive’ evidence combining documents, statements, and forensics. Public service broadcasters exhibit the highest levels of verification complexity (hard fact-checking), contrasting with global news agencies, which generally favor softer fact-checking approaches, except for DPA.