A post by Africa Facts Zone on February 27th, 2020 pertaining to Ghana’s position in Africa and the world has generated several shares and comments capturing a mix of commendations and doubt.
Image Source: Facebook.com
Dubawa took a look at the claims mentioned to ascertain truths and non truths from the post.
But before that, we reached out to the owner of the page, IsimaOdeh, on twitter to find out the information sources used in the post. According to IsimaOdeh, the claims were based on basic google research. Upon further research, Dubawa found that although the information posted could be found online, some were dated while some were unreliable. We address the claims successively below.
Claim 1:Ghana has free education.
Partly true. Ghana has free compulsory universal basic education and free senior high school education available to public schools. Tertiary education, however, with the exception of Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET) under the Ghana Education Service(GES), is not free.
Verification:
The Ghanaian government, in a bid to get more children into school, set up the Free Compulsory Universal Basic Education (FCUBE) in the 1990s. The programme made provisions to cover non-tuition fees of children who are of primary school going age.
The FCUBE policy makes access to basic education in Ghana a right for all citizens irrespective of gender, geographical location, religion or ethnic background.
Basic education here covers two years kindergarten, six years primary and three years junior high school.
The policy is embedded in the 1992 Constitution which stipulates that,
“All persons shall have the right to equal educational opportunities and facilities and with a view to achieving the full realisation of that right, basic education shall be free, compulsory and available to all.”
In more recent times, education in Ghana has now included a free education policy for public secondary level schools. The free SHS policy was launched on September 12, 2017 by the Nana Akufo-Addo-led administration. The government’s move was to remove pressures from otherwise burdened parents by covering secondary school level bills including feeding fees, tuition fees, admission fees, library fees, examination fees, free textbooks, free boarding etc.
All educational levels in private schools are not covered in either the FCUBE policy or the Free SHS policy in the country.
Claim 2: Ghana has free basic healthcare.
True. The National Health Insurance Scheme in Ghana is the authority that is charged with managing and ensuring free basic healthcare for all persons in Ghana.
Verification:
Ghana has a National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) which is entrusted with the responsibility of ensuring access to basic healthcare services to all citizens. The facility is, however, limited in its execution with some tests, medication and treatments not catered for by the scheme. In some cases the nature of requests made by doctors, and depending on the specific case, may warrant payments by patients or be covered by the NHIS.
Additionally, not all hospitals accept or operate with the NHIS. The scheme has a list of accredited facilities that offer services to citizens including some pharmacies, polyclinics, district and regional hospitals, among others.
Claim 3:Ghana was the world’s fastest growing economy in 2018 and 2019
False. Ghana was one of the world’s fastest growing economies, the sixth, in 2018, and 15th in 2019 after it was projected to remain in that rank in 2019 as well.
Verification:
Economic growth is the process by which a nation’s wealth increases over time. It is measured by the monetary value of goods and services produced within a country in a specified time period. A country’s placement on global economic growth ranking is a distinguishing indicator for thriving or failing economies.
According to data from the World Bank, Ghana was the world’s 15th fastest growing economy with a 6.5% growth rate in 2019. Among Sub-Saharan African countries however, it was 6th.
Claim 4: Ghana is Africa’s third most peaceful country.
True. Ghana is the 3rd most peaceful country in Africa, according to the Global Peace Index.
Verification:
According to the 14th edition of the Global Peace Index (GPI), which ranks 163 independent states and territories according to their level of peacefulness, Ghana is the third most peaceful country in Africa.
The report, produced by the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP) and covering the year 2020, presents the most comprehensive data on the state of global peace. Ghana is 43rd globally and 3rd in sub-Saharan Africa.
Image source: Global Peace Index 2020
Claim 5: Ghana has Africa’s third strongest currency.
True. Ghana holds Africa’s third strongest currency when held up against the US dollar.
Verification:
The strength of a currency is based on the rate of international market demand. Based on this, on a global scale, two of the most powerful currencies are the US Dollar and the British Pound against which all other currencies are held because they are used for all manner of transactions worldwide.
Using the US Dollar as a benchmark, the top 5 African currencies in 2020 were the Libyan Dinar(1 USD = LD 1.41), the Tunisian Dinar(1 USD = DT 2.87), the Ghana Cedi(1 USD = GH₵ 5.49), the Moroccan Dirham(1 USD = MAD 9.89), and the Botswana Pula(1 USD = P 10.90).
In 2021, the Libyan Dinar dropped from its spot at the top after the Libyan Central Bank introduced a new unified exchange rate in January 2021. The new rate is 4.8 Dinar to 1 US dollar with the Tunisian Dinar coming first with DT 2.73 to 1 US dollar.. Ghana however will retain its 3rd position as the Ghana cedi still comes after the Libyan dinar at about GHC 5.72 to 1 US dollar.
Claim 6: Ghana is the fourth most powerful country in Africa.
False. Ghana is Africa’s fifth most powerful country.
Verification:
What is a powerful country?
Countries are said to be powerful based on leadership, economic influence, political influence, strong international alliances and strong military. Such countries are found to dominate news headlines and are considered relevant in shaping the global outlook. Some of the world’s most powerful countries are the United States of America, Russia, and China.
Factors like the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), Population and Per Capita Gross Domestic Product are valued to measure power ranking in economic terms.
Egypt maintained its number one position in Africa from 2019, followed by South Africa, Morocco, Kenya, Ghana, Tunisia and others. According to this report, Ghana is fifth in the African best or most powerful countries.
Other basic Google searches including this one did not mention Ghana at all in their list of powerful countries.
Claim 7: Ghana is the fourth country in Africa to have the cheapest internet.
False. Ghana’s internet is the sixth cheapest in Africa according to available information.
Verification:
In 2019, according to Alliance for Affordable Internet (A4AI), data affordability is achieved when 1GB of mobile broadband data costs no more that 2% of average monthly income in a country. Africa, according to news reports, pays some of the highest internet user costs in the world.
In 2020, after updating their mode of calculating the cheapest data-only mobile-broadband basket per economy using the provision of 1.5GB high speed internet over a thirty day period, A4AI reports that Ghanaians are paying 2.03% of Gross National Income (GNI).
A report by Statista.com on most affordable internet usage in Africa found Ghana placing 6th in 2020; a gigabyte cost an average of 0.94 US Dollars. Somalia, according to the report, has the cheapest internet in Africa with one gigabyte costing 0.50 US Dollars. By contrast, the highest price was recorded in Sao Tome and Principe, where one gigabyte cost 28.26 U.S. dollars on average.
Members of the WhatsApp community have been warned of the risks in contracting the Covid-19 virus through their sewage systems, connected to their homes through bath tubs, toilets and drains.
This would by extension render even those in isolation and self-confined individuals at risk of contracting the deadly disease.
The message reads thus:
Image Source: WhatsApp
Verification
Claim 1: Dutch Authorities found the virus in sewage systems.
Mostly true. Although the Dutch study found the coronavirus within their sewer system, there was no mention of the virus growth and multiplication within the study.
Verification:
A study conducted on sewage samples from seven(7) cities and the airport in the Netherlands on the presence of coronavirus in sewage discovered that the virus that causes the Covid-19 disease was present in wastewater. This study was the first report of detection of SARS-CoV-2 in sewage.
What does finding the virus in sewage mean?
This means that one or more people in the community likely excreted the virus through urine, faeces or by coughing or sneezing. This is detected through molecular tests such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests which can detect the presence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus via fragments of genetic material (RNA) in wastewater.
Claim 2: Covid-19 can be transmitted through exposure to wastewater.
Insufficient evidence. The WHO says there is no evidence that Covid-19 has been transmitted through sewerage systems. Some studies however suggest transmission may be possible under certain conditions.
Verification:
According to information accessed on March 9th, 2021 on the updated questions and answers section of the World Health Organization (WHO) website, there is no evidence that the COVID-19 virus has been transmitted through sewerage systems.
However, some studies, including one by Amoah, Kumari and Bux (2020), found that exposure to untreated wastewater within those two days after viral shedding may lead to potential infections. This study also highlights the potential risk of infection for workers in wastewater treatment facilities and even in the public through faulty plumbing and bursting of sewer networks.
People who work with sewage have therefore been advised to avoid direct contact with sewage and to avoid ingesting, swallowing, or inhaling spray or mist from the water as it contains various pathogens.
Claim 3: Covid-19 in sewerage systems can be curbed by pouring bleach into drains and other sewage outlets.
Insufficient evidence. High concentrations of disinfectants in wastewater can destroy the coronavirus because of the fragile outer membrane of the virus. Research however indicates that doing so may jeopardize scientific research and affect the treatment plants.
Verification:
Many chemical disinfectants like bleach work against the novel coronavirus, but it is important to use them properly and never ingest them or apply them to your skin.
The Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention (CDC) and the World Health Organization recommend using a bleach solution as a way to disinfect areas contaminated with the novel coronavirus. It is however unclear whether the use of bleach in drains and toilets can completely eradicate the virus. Studies indicate that wastewater treatment processes can inactivate the virus in the wastewater but this is mostly on a larger scale. Individually, disinfectants used in home drains can support removal of the virus from the direct tubes and drains but reports also suggests that the use of bleach may also cause a stall in scientific research on the virus as bleach will kill the ribonucleic acid(RNA) of the virus.
Can wastewater find its way into your home?
Yes. Waste material can find its way into homes. This is called a sewer backup; this happens when water is pushed back into homes through pipes from the sewer or drainage systems. Backups can be caused by clogging or blockage of a city’s mains or a building’s plumbing system , old sewer systems etc. For instance, flushing materials like diapers or sanitary towels in toilet bowls has the potential of causing a blockage and possibly a backup.
This occurrence is potentially dangerous as it can cause infections or diseases because it lets off air-borne contaminants as well as physical contaminants. The inhalation of the vapors alone is dangerous as toxins are released into the air. Additionally, some diseases can be caused from bacteria, viruses and parasites that may surface because of sewer backups like salmonellosis, gastroenteritis, threadworm infection, hookworm infections among others. Proper maintenance of the sewage system is necessary to avoid such incidents.
Claim: Many news websites say Ghanaian soccer international, Michael Essien lost over 1 million followers on Twitter after making an Instagram post to declare solidarity for LGBTQIs in Ghana.
False. Social media indices used to assess the following of Michael Essien on Twitter show that he has not lost a million followers on the platform.
Full text
Many news websites including Daily GuideNetwork, Modern Ghana, GhanaWeb and GhPage claim that Ghanaian soccer international and former Chelsea FC star, Michael Essien has lost over 1 million followers on social media after declaring solidarity with groups demanding equal rights for LGBTQIs in Ghana.
Several social media posts such as this and this also made such claims. Some of the publications claim the follower count drop was recorded on Twitter while others said it occurred on Instagram.
Michael Essien’s post that reportedly led to the mass exodus of followers was published on his Instagram page. It has since been deleted after several backlash by the commenting public.
“Ghana supports equality. We see you, we support you. Our LGBTQIA plus community in Ghana”, that Essien shared on his Instagram account,” the post read.
The claim is curious because, among other things, there are only about 2 million Instagram accounts and 695,000 Twitter accounts in Ghana, according to Hootsuite’s 2021 Digital Report for Ghana and so it appears unlikely that the majority of these numbers will unfollow Essien on his platforms. (Page 48 & 51).
Twitter: Relying on the free Twitter monitoring application provided by SocialBakers, an AI-powered social media marketing company we run a scan on Michael Essien’s personal Twitter page and noticed that his followers on Twitter on 2nd March 2021 when the controversial post was made, did not fall but rather increased significantly compared to previous days.
The application recorded at least 560 net new followers.
This was a sharp rise in the number of net new followers compared to previous days.
See the graphs below for the visual representation:
Essien’s follower growth since February 2021Essien’s net followers since February 2021
Conclusion
Based on the information above, we conclude that the claim that Ghanaian football star Michael Essien lost over a million followers on social media after declaring solidarity with LGBTQIs in Ghana is false.
Certainly, any one inclined to follow the Ghanaian political climate knows that shortly after the swearing in of the President comes his ministerial appointments to assist him with the executive/sector and regional governance. To this end, the media is currently saturated with the coverage of and reports on the ministerial vetting which started on February 10, 2021 and is expected to end on March 9, 2021.
Unlike the President and Members of Parliament who are elected directly by citizens of Ghana, the Minister of State is not. The Minister’s appointment into office is principally facilitated by these very two arms of government – the President and Members of Parliament. On the basis of the provisions in the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, a simple summary for the appointment of Ministers of State is this; nominated by the President, approved by Parliament.
Appointment of a Minister of State (Executive/Sector Minister)
According to Article 78, Chapter 8 of the 1992 Constitution of Ghana, anyone holding such an office is appointed by the President with prior approval of parliament from among Members of the Parliament.
Also, if anyone has ever wondered why most Members of Parliament in the legislative wing of government function simultaneously in the executive wing as Executive or Sector Ministers of States, it is because the Constitution is the basis for this. Article 78 stipulates that the majority of Ministers of State must be appointed from among the Parliament.
It states;
(1) Ministers of State shall be appointed by the President with the prior approval of Parliament from among members of Parliament or persons qualified to be elected as members of Parliament, except that the majority of Ministers of State shall be appointed from among members of Parliament.
(2) The President shall appoint such a number of Ministers of State as may be necessary for the efficient running of the State.
(3) A Minister of State shall not hold any other office of profit or emolument whether private or public and whether directly or indirectly unless otherwise permitted by the Speaker acting on the recommendations of a committee of Parliament on the ground—
(a) that holding that office will not prejudice the work of a Minister; and
(b) that no conflict of interest arises or would arise as a result of the Minister holding that office.
By the same token, Article 79 of the 1992 Constitution makes provision for the appointment of deputy ministers with a similar procedure and criteria. However in this case, a deputy’s appointment is in consultation with the Minister of State on the subject.
It states;
(1) The President may, in consultation with a Minister of State, and with the prior approval of Parliament, appoint one or more Deputy Ministers to assist the Minister in the performance of his functions.
(2) A person shall not be appointed a Deputy Minister unless he is a Member of Parliament or is qualified to be elected as a member of Parliament
(3) Clause(3) of article 78 applies to a Deputy Minister as it applies to a Minister of State.
Appointment of a Minister of State (Regional Minister)
Article 256 of Chapter 20 in the 1992 Constitution makes provision for the appointment of a regional minister and the deputy or deputies by a similar process. It however provides no constitutional requirement for the regional minister to be a Member of Parliament.
It states;
(1) The President shall, with the prior approval of Parliament, appoint for each region, a Minister of State who shall
(a) represent the President in the region; and
(b) be responsible for the co-ordination and direction of the administrative machinery in the region.
(2) The President may, in consultation with the Minister of State for a region and with the prior approval of Parliament, appoint for the region a Deputy Minister or Deputy Ministers to perform such functions as the President may determine.
Approval or rejection of a Minister of State
According to the Constitution, Parliament is mandated to grant ‘prior approval’ to the president’s nominated ministers.
Order 172 of the Standing Orders of the Parliament of Ghana makes provision for a committee comprising some Members of Parliament to be responsible for recommending to the parliament the approval or rejection of persons which include the Minister of State and Deputy Ministers, nominated by the President.
Persons who are nominated by the President for ministerial appointments consequently undergo a publicized proceeding (vetting process) by an Appointments Committee of Parliament. Thereafter, the Committee reports to the House three days after all the proceedings have ended, in order for the House to vote. It is noteworthy that the basis for the approval or rejection of nominated ministers is hinged on a 50% determiner voting either through secret ballot or consensus by Members of Parliament.
Order 172 of the Standing Orders of the Parliament of Ghana states;
(1) There shall be a Committee to be known as the Appointments Committee composed of the First Deputy Speaker as Chairman and not more than twenty-five other Members.
(2) It shall be the duty of the Committee to recommend to Parliament for approval or otherwise persons nominated by the President for appointment as Ministers of State, Deputy Ministers, Members of the Council of State, the Chief Justice and other Justices of the Supreme Court, and such other persons specified under the Constitution or under any other enactment.
(3) The names of persons nominated for appointment in the Committee shall be published, and the proceedings of the Committee shall be held in public.
(4) The Committee shall report to Parliament within three days after it has concluded its proceedings when Parliament is sitting. Parliamentary approval of persons recommended for appointment shall be by secret ballot or by consensus.
(5) Each Member shall be provided with a sheet of paper on which appears the names of all candidates for approval or rejection. Against the name of each candidate shall be two columns, one for AYES indicating approval and the other for NOES indicating rejection.
(6) A cross against one name in the AYES column and another cross against the same name in the NOES column shall render the vote null and void.
(7) Every ballot paper shall bear the stamp and the initial of the Speaker.
(8) A candidate who fails to secure fifty per cent of the votes cast is rejected.
Swearing in of a Minister of State
Article 80, Chapter 8, of the 1992 Constitution stipulates that upon approval of a minister, an oath shall be taken by all such persons.
It states;
A Minister of State or Deputy Minister shall not enter upon the duties of his office unless he has taken and subscribed to the oath of allegiance, the oath of Minister of State and the Cabinet oath, as the case may be, set out in the Second Schedule to this Constitution.
Tenure of office of ministers
Furthermore Article 81, Chapter 8 of the 1992 Constitution shows the conditions for the vacancy of the minister’s office.
It states;
The office of a Minister of State or a Deputy Minister shall become vacant if
(a) his appointment is revoked by the President; or
(b) he is elected as Speaker or Deputy Speaker, or
(c) he resigns from office; or
(d) he dies.
Vote of Censure
Additionally clause 5 of Article 82, in Chapter 8 of the 1992 Constitution lists the condition for which a President can revoke a Minister’s appointment as stated in Article 80 clause a. It shows that this can occur when a minister is censured by parliament, which is provided for in this article.
Article 82 states;
(1) Parliament may, by a solution supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds of all the members of Parliament, pass a vote of censure on a Minister of State.
(2) A motion for the resolution referred to in clause (1) of this article shall not be moved in Parliament unless—
(a) seven days’ notice has been given of the motion; and
(b) the notice for the motion has been signed by not less than one-third of all the members of Parliament;
(3) The motion shall be debated in Parliament within fourteen days after the receipt by the Speaker of the notice for the motion.
(4) A Minister of State in respect of whom a vote of censure is debated under clause (3) of this article is entitled, during the debate, to be heard in his defence.
(5) Where a vote of censure is passed against a Minister under this article the President may, unless the Minister resigns his office, revoke his appointment as a Minister.
(6) For the avoidance of doubt this article applies to a Deputy Minister as it applies to a Minister of State.
Conclusion:
To be appointed as a Minister of State in Ghana, having been nominated by the President as distinguished to serve and be referred to as ‘Honourable’ in the capacity of both the legislative arm and executive arm of government, it is for certain that this minister has been vetted and approved by the Parliament of Ghana.
Dubawa is officially a year old in Ghana and what an exciting and eventful year it has been!
Our primary goal in establishing a fact-checking platform in Ghana was to contribute to the fight against misinformation and disinformation, by ensuring access to accurate and truthful information, and in the spirit of our motto, to ‘amplify truth.’
Dubawa’s approach to addressing the problem of ‘fake news’ and increasing awareness of fact-checking has been multi-thronged: rigorous fact-checking, fact-checking training, and media and information literacy.
Media And Fact-checking Ecosystem in Ghana
By February 2020 when Dubawa was launched, Ghana’s media landscape was largely pluralised with a lot more Ghanaians able to access more information on mainstream and social media and on the internet than a decade ago. While this is good for the country’s growing democracy and especially for freedom of expression, it also raises concerns about the increasing spread of misinformation and disinformation, commonly referred to as ‘fake news’, in the country. This is in spite of the much-contested Electronic Communications Act (2008) which criminalises the dissemination of fake news in the country. Offenders are liable to a fine of GHS 36,000 (about $6,250) and up to five years imprisonment.
Through preliminary desk research and a Dubawa commissioned survey, we found that fact-checking as a response to addressing fake news was not mainstream although some media outlets engaged in ad hoc or occasional fact-checking. Coincidentally, by 2019 when the expansion of Dubawa to Ghana was conceived, GhanaFact, a full time fact-checking platform was launched and the Media Foundation for West Africa’s fact-checking project, Fact Check Ghana, which was vibrant in 2016 but became dormant sometime in 2017 was relaunched later in 2020. Dubawa was established to, alongside these existing organisations, deepen the culture of truth amplification in Ghana.
With Ghana’s December 2020 elections, expected to be keenly contested considering the key contenders were a former and a sitting president, on the horizon, the problem of ‘fake news’ was expected to take centre stage. Taking into account the havoc wrought by misinformation and disinformation even on developed democracies like the United States of America, a quick and strategic response was needed.
Dubawa’s Interventions
The key thing we did in furtherance of our objectives was to raise awareness about the dangers of misinformation and disinformation and the need for fact-checking in Ghana. This message was first sold to stakeholders at Dubawa’s official launch which was chaired by the Chairperson of the National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE), Ms Josephine Oppong and had the former Information Minister, Kojo Oppong Nkrumah, as the keynote speaker. The Ministry of Information was later instrumental in our Covid-19 misinformation fight as it served as a pathway to reach Ghanaians with verified Covid-19 information and fact-checking tips.
Over the period, Dubawa organised fact-checking training for members of the media and blogging community and other stakeholders. Participants in our training sessions did not only share the knowledge and skills gained with colleagues but also incorporated them into their work. They were also instrumental in supporting Dubawa’s effort at countering misinformation during the December 7, 2020 elections.
Further inspired by the need to address the menace of misinformation and disinformation in the country, a six-month fact-checking fellowship, which commenced in August 2020 was organised. The fellowship was open to practising journalists in new media platforms (online blogs), newspaper, radio and TV stations, and researchers with the aim of providing an opportunity for journalists to acquire skills and knowledge in fact-checking; contribute to countering misinformation and disinformation by writing truth-based and factual stories; and also to institute a culture of fact-checking in newsrooms.
From the onset, we realised the importance of collaboration. We worked with the knowledge that misinformation is widespread and needed to be tackled collectively by all stakeholders. And we were right. Our partnership with the media, Alliance for African Women Initiative (AFAWI), the National Commission for Civic Education (NCCE), and the Coalition for Domestic Election Observers (CODEO) achieved major results.
Within the period, Dubawa as signatories to the International Fact-checking Network (IFCN) contributed to the CoronavirusFacts Alliance which has brought together fact-checkers from over 70 countries, publishes fact-check reports in over 40 languages, and has produced over 9,000 fact-checks since the Alliance started in March 2020. Also, as a partner to Facebook and its Third-Party Fact-checking Programme, Dubawa contributed to fighting misinformation on the platform.
We are grateful to the numerous partners who have been with us on this journey. We invite you to join us if you are yet to.
Missed our fact-checks last year?
Here are some of our top-performing fact-check reports of 2020:
Hibiscus tea otherwise called Sobolo, sobo/zobo, according to a viral video, has been used by China to cure the novel coronavirus, Covid-19. The claimant, Nana Okogyedom Ntim-Barimah, Executive Director for Soul Health and Wellness Center, claimed the Chinese used ‘sobolo’ to cure the COVID-19 and called on Ghanaians to do the same.
In the video, Nana Ntim-Berimah refers to two articles that he suggests have information on the use of the flower as a cure for the coronavirus in China. Click here for full fact-check.
A few days to the 2020 elections, a viral video with accompanying narratives suggesting the President of the country and New Patriotic Party (NPP) candidate, Nana Addo Dankwa Akufo-Addo, was caught on video receiving a bribe. This was discussed extensively on mainstream media and social media by the opposition party NDC with the narrative purporting that Akufo-Addo took a USD40,000 bribe in 2017 in his capacity as president, in order not to sack Alhaji Abbas who is the director of Urban Roads. Click here for full fact-check
Ghana’s Electoral Commission (EC) came under criticism from a section of the public following the official declaration of the 2020 election results. Most of the criticisms have been about how the Commission has not been able to effectively undertake its clerical functions for the purposes of updating the public. One of such was an artwork announcing the result of the Essikado-Ketan parliamentary elections. Many pro-opposition Facebook groups including NDC TV and some commentators shared images to claim that the Commission published results for six parliamentary candidates for the Essikado-Ketan seat when in fact, only three people contested for the seat.
Claim: The United States of America is giving free visas to members of Ghana’s LGBTQ+ community.
Verdict: False. The U.S. is not giving free visas to LGBTQ+ individuals in Ghana.
Full Text
The issue of LGBTQ+ in Ghana has been in the news for weeks following the launch of an LGBTQ+ office in Ghana.
Image source: Instagram
The claim was being circulated on Instagram and was forwarded to Dubawa for fact-checking. The conversation on LGBTQ+ communities in Ghana has been and is still being discussed widely and, as such, all issues concerning the matter warrant clarification.
Verification
Firstly, we subjected the image to Google Reverse Image Search and found that the news source is fake. The frame was traced to photofunia, a site that allows users to edit images and apply picture effects to any image of their choosing within seconds. This can be done at no cost and users have a variety of options to choose from and to suit their purpose.
Secondly, the claim being made is being stretched out of context. Joseph Biden, the President of the United States of America has, according to a reuters report, stated that US agencies abroad increase efforts to ensure that asylum seekers who belong to LGBTQ+ communities be given equal access to protection and increased use of referrals to expedite resettlement of vulnerable people, in this case, criminalized LGBTQ individuals and LGBTQ refugees and asylum seekers.
In a BBC Pidgin news report, it was also stated that the US will favour LGBTQ+ community members with resettlement visas, having recognized that such individuals face discrimination or threats in their home countries. As stated in the report, the US Federal Government will take all necessary steps to increase Embassy Priority-1 referrals and also to identify and quickly process resettlement for the highly vulnerable who are in need of protection. Priority-1 referrals are refugee cases that include all cases individually identified and referred to the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees(UNHCR), a U.S. embassy or a non-governmental organization.
We reached out to the US embassy in Ghana and were referred to the Important Note for Current and Future Visa Applicants section of their website. There is no mention of free visas for members of the LGBTQ+ community in Ghana on the site, indicating no change in Visa needs or qualifications as otherwise suggested by the claim.
Conclusion:
The U.S. is not giving free visas to Ghanaian LGBTQ+ community members but the country is making plans to prioritise priority-1 referrals.
On Wednesday 24 February 2021 the first consignment of COVID-19 vaccines arrived in Ghana. According to the Ministry of Information, 600,000 doses of COVID-19 AstraZeneca vaccines made by the Serum Institute of India (Covishield) was delivered to the government of Ghana, where deployment of the vaccines is scheduled to start on March 2, 2021 among the segmented population in the country.
A week prior to this, on Friday, 19 February 2021, the Ministry of Information moderated a public engagement on the government of Ghana’s COVID-19 vaccination roll out plan.
Group 1 are considered people at most risk and includes health care workers, frontline security personnel, persons with underlying health conditions, 60 and above persons, and frontline members of the executive, legislative and judiciary.
Group 2 includes the rest of the executive, legislative and judiciary, other essential service providers such as rest of security agencies, water supply agencies, electricity supply services, teachers and students, supply and distribution of fuels, farmers and food value chain, telecommunication services, air traffic and civil aviation services, meteorological services, air transport services, waste management services, media, public and private commercial transport services, the police service, the Armed Forces, Prisons Service, Immigration Service, National Fire Service, and the CEPS division of the rest of Ghana Revenue Authority.
Group 3 includes rest of the general public (all persons 18 years and above excluding pregnant women)
Group 4 includes pregnant women and persons under 18 years when an approved vaccine for this group is found.
Also, for all such persons considered, the vaccines will be deployed either via outreach, mobile, static, campout or a combination of all. More specifically, the following strategies will be deployed for the following groups as shown below:
Target groups
Potential delivery strategy
Potential vaccination sites
Health workers
Fixed sites
Health centres, hospitals (public and private)
60+ persons
Fixed and outreach sites Temporary/ mobile clinicsMass campaigns
Health centres, hospitals, outreach points, pharmacies, marketplace and other public places, drive-through
Persons with underlying medical conditions
Fixed sites and outreach sitesTemporary/mobile clinics
Primary health care facilities, outpatient clinics, hospitals, workplaces, through mobile teams for those confined at home, other public and private establishments
Other target groups
Fixed site and outreach sitesTemporary / mobile clinics Mass campaigns
Any of above plus special strategies to reach specialised population groups
Source: Expanded Programme on Immunisation, Ghana Health Service
Additionally, the regions mapped out for the administering of the initial doses are ‘Greater Accra metro’ and ‘Greater Ashanti metro’ with ‘Western’ to follow next. This is based on the regional active cases and cumulative cases of COVID-19 over the period of March 2020 to February 2021 which showed these segmented regions to have recorded the highest cases in the country.
On account of the task ahead, Dr. Amponsa-Achiano added that there will be a deployment of 12,471 vaccinators, 37,413 volunteers and 2079 team supervisors for a planned two rounds of vaccination campaign. Training for the vaccination team will be restricted to smaller groups of both virtual and in-person practical approaches. To ensure vaccine safety, there will also be active and passive surveillance during and post campaign.
Also, he stated that to be considered fully vaccinated in Ghana, one is required to have two doses of the vaccines.
Conclusion:
It is expected that public engagement on the COVID-19 vaccination roll out plan will be held periodically by the appropriate institutions in order to continually address outstanding concerns of citizens and convey government’s intentions on vaccination concurrently especially as the first consignment of vaccines have already arrived in the country. By so doing, it also equally immunizes the Ghanaian community against any potential vaccination misconception and misinformation.
The discourse on COVID-19 vaccines as a possible panacea for the ongoing pandemic has varied progressively from the onset of the pandemic to the discovery of vaccines. The narrative has ranged from the seeming anticipation of a vaccine, probes on its efficacy, queries on its affordability, preservability and sustainability, to its general acceptability by users; where science, religion, culture, and emotions are among the basis influencing many of such interrogations and discussions.
In Ghana, when the president of the Republic announced in January 2021 that the government’s aim is to vaccinate the entire population with an initial target of 20 million people, it was noticeable that the discourse intensified. Detailing further that the government was hopeful that by the end of June 2021, 17.6 million vaccine doses would have been procured for the country, where the earliest vaccine is expected by March 2021, the president inadvertently gave Ghanaians an added scope to express their divergent views on the subject.
In light of this, a few Ghanaian-oriented tweets which were sampled, gave the lead to a thematic analysis on Ghanaians’ views on the vaccine – and admittedly, does not reflect a representative sample of the entire population’s general reasoning and sentiments about the government’s vaccination agenda. In consideration of these views, therefore, the falsities identified therein are debunked while the appropriate information required is supplied, wherever applicable.
Anti-vaccination
A number of Ghanaians have indicated their unwillingness to get vaccinated with a foreign vaccine. A user identified as Dee, for example, has expressed refusal to use a vaccine from a ‘white man with unknown intentions’, for fear of being ‘used as a guinea pig.’
It appears people such as @Dee07 may prefer a locally manufactured vaccine as it has further been suggested that Ghana should source local scientists to conduct research and trials into potent vaccines.
@Rockson2, who detailed this in a thread with some recommendations to the government in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, included that the government should receive some of the AstraZeneca doses being put on hold in South Africa by appointing a chief vaccine negotiator from a private sector with industry connections and focus majorly on two regions in Ghana with the highest percentage of cases for the vaccination strategy to reduce the spread to other regions and appoint a chief vaccine spokesperson from the science community and not one from the political domain.
In his recommendations, Gregory Rockson made some remarkable points that were worth looking into.
Claim 1: @Rockson2 stated that the dominant variant in Ghana is the UK variant, and it is known that the AstraZeneca vaccine works effectively against that variant.
Prof Awandare stated in January that the Centre’s “January sequencing data shows clearly that B.1.1.7 (first reported in the UK) is now the predominant strain driving local transmission in Ghana.’’
According to the studies reported, a single AstraZeneca vaccine dose is 76% effective for protecting against the virus up to 3 months, and increasing to 82% effectiveness with a second dose after a 12-week interval. Also, the vaccine can reduce the spread of the virus up to 67% after one dose which suggests that those vaccinated are unlikely to infect others.
Claim 2: Again, @Rockson2, in recommending the regional focus of the government’s vaccination strategy to achieve herd immunity stated that the Greater Accra Region and Ashanti Region have over 90% of cases.
Data from the Ghana Health Service (GHS) shows that as at February 8 2021, Greater Accra Region records the highest number of cases being 43,497 and active cases being 3,754 and Ashanti Region records the second highest number of cases being 13,361 and active cases being 1,353, both over a national total cases of 74,347 and total active cases of 7,509.
Therefore, the assertion that Greater Accra Region and Ashanti Region have over 90% of cases is inaccurate, as they record 76% of cases and 68% of active cases respectively, as at February 8, 2021. However, both regions do record the highest number of cases, and in that regard, the recommendation for the vaccination strategy to focus on those regions may still hold.
Alternate COVID-19 vaccines
Halidu Yakubu’s tweet also suggests the support for the procurement of vaccines. In fact, in his tweet, @YakubuHalidu rather commends the need for the government to import other COVID-19 vaccines such as Sputnik from Russia – a suggestion which is similarly shared, explained and argued for by Dr. Asiedu Sarpong, who is a pharmacist and research fellow at Centre for Democratic Development (CDD)-Ghana.
Claim
However, in @YakubuHalidu’s contemplation for this preferred Sputnik vaccine, he claimed that the vaccine being imported by the government is ‘that of Bill Gates’. He further alleges that ‘the Vice President once spoke to Bill Gates for vaccines to be injected on March 21.’
Meanwhile, @YakubuHalidu’s claim of the Vice President speaking to Bill Gates on COVID-19 vaccines cannot be proven beyond what is publicly reported since the only recent publicly known interaction Ghana’s Vice President has had with Bill Gates on vaccines was not COVID-19-related but polio-related in September 2020, whereby at the time there was no known WHO-approved COVID-19 vaccine as yet.
Austin Charles, whose contribution also suggested the approval of having vaccines in Ghana, admonishes for vaccine literacy to be intensified. In his tweet, @mr_ablordey gives the reason for the vaccine education to be the existing skepticism on the efficacy of the vaccines in view of its alleged several negative effects.
Similarly, Dr Alexander Dodoo, the Director-General of the Ghana Standards Authority who has appeared in a number of mainstream media interviews discussing the arrival of COVID-19 vaccines in Ghana, has advised for more community engagement on vaccines to be held to enable Ghanaians understand the uses and limitations of vaccines against COVID-19. He also showed that none of the vaccines is 100% and they vary in their efficacy percentages and doses needed.
“We need to get the public ready not just for the vaccine but to also expect that the protection offered by the vaccine goes with some amount of risk. There will be side effects. And it’s not going to be 100% safe. It never happens. So we need to communicate that there will be a lot of benefits, but there will be an accompanying measurable amount of tolerable risk which the population should be ready for,” Dr. Dodoo said.
“The reaction of the immune system to foreign elements is different for everyone so some of these things are expected. When the vaccine arrives in Ghana, you’ll realize someone will have no effects after taking the vaccination, some will have slight headaches and I’ve even experienced someone collapse after being vaccinated,” Dr. Sylnaken said.
“COVID-19 vaccination will help protect you from getting COVID-19. You may have some side effects, which are normal signs that your body is building protection. These side effects may affect your ability to do daily activities, but they should go away in a few days,” CDC said
The CDC has listed some possible common side effects of a COVID-19 vaccine as shown below:
It is being revealed that the issue most people have with vaccines in Ghana is not so much of getting vaccinated as it is about unknown issues surrounding the vaccines. In this contribution, for example, Sir Nana Kokote suggests the order of the administration of vaccines, perhaps in order to trust the safety of the vaccines. In his tweet, @kokote_sir states that the government of Ghana should administer the COVID-19 vaccines from the top (presidency) to the bottom (ordinary citizens), as was done for the issuing of the Ghana card.
For all Ghanaians interested in being vaccinated against COVID-19 with the procured vaccines, the Ghana Health Service has assured that the vaccine will be free to the average Ghanaian, thusconfirming that no one is to be charged to be vaccinated.
However, some categories of persons will be exempted from being vaccinated, unless otherwise recommended by a doctor, as was listed by the Director-General of Ghana Standards Authority, Dr Alexander Dodoo. They include people with allergies, underlying health conditions, HIV/AIDS, undergoing cancer treatment, children under age 16, pregnant women, and the aged, due to the possible compromise of such persons’ immune systems and in the case of children, their proven protection and inability to pass on the virus.
Conclusion
Evidently, the government of Ghana has put in measures to help control the spread of COVID-19 such as the procurement of vaccines in ensuring that the entire population is vaccinated. Some Ghanaians through the different available media platforms, have expressed their views accordingly with an array of their terms and conditions for vaccination – some of which may apply, some of which may not.
Since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, the wearing of masks and other protective protocols have been imposed on citizens in the various countries affected by the virus.
This is the case in Ghana as well and much more so now that figures of daily infections have risen exponentially with the country’s active case count reaching 8216 by February 10 as reported by the Ghana Health Service.
First, it is important to note that the mask is only part of a more comprehensive strategy to mitigate the spread of the coronavirus. It is not the sole requirement and must, as such, be used with the other measures like frequent hand washing with soap, the use of sanitizers in the absence of water and soap, physical distancing, coughing or sneezing into the elbows among others.
Some issues identified with the use of masks in Ghana
Disposal of masks
A fair number of Ghanaians do wear their masks but what is worrying is the way the masks are handled as the risks associated with improper handling of masks are grossly underestimated. As an occasional commuter, I have come across individuals who keep on damaged and defaced disposable masks, disregarding the disposability of the product.
I have observed drivers of public transport take off and hang their masks on their rear view mirrors, put it back on with no regard for where their hands have been and repeat the process over and over again.
Medical masks are to be disposed of after use or once damaged.
Familiarisation with mask users
Another issue is regarding certain individuals as safe. For people who share spaces, like families and co-workers, there is the tendency to overlook certain cautions as there is likely a familiarisation or sharing system in place. I have personally caught myself reaching to take my mother’s mask or basically any mask at home because I am feeling lazy or need to dash out quickly. This is absolutely risky as it is impossible to know what that mask has come contact with. Familiarisation should be cut out when handling masks or other protective items especially during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Disregard for severity of the need for caution
While it is important to keep our masks on at all times when in public, it is almost impossible to do so during the entirety of the wearing period. Therefore, the state of one’s hands before and after putting on the mask, removing or adjusting the mask could save the wearer from potential infection. The World Health Organisation (WHO) says that people are to ensure hands are clean before picking up and wearing the mask. There can be a transfer of the virus from your hand to the mask or from the mask onto your hand. It is that technical.
Likewise, during the period in which the mask is worn, there is the possibility of the mask sliding down while laughing or talking and this may require readjustment. It is almost automatic to quickly adjust it and go back to whatever was occupying the individual’s time but hands need to be disinfected prior to doing that. This is because the virus, if on the surface of the mask, can be transferred from the mask to your hand and consequently to other things like your phone, bag, hair etc.
This also applies to aftercare once reaching a safe space. It is important to wash hands or sanitize immediately after taking your mask off and disposing it.
As the virus cannot be seen with the naked eye, it is impossible to know when you come into contact with someone who has the virus or something, like a surface, on which the virus has settled. (It is safe to say that being a germaphobe is allowed now😅)
It is important to note that masks are not antiviral and do not kill the coronavirus.
WHO guidelines on masks usage
Since the how of wearing medical masks and cloth masks have been established, focus needs to be drawn to other factors associated with its use, such as storage, cleaning and disposal. The World Health Organisation(WHO) has listed the following as guidelines for the use of masks:
Clean your hands before you put your mask on, as well as before and after you take it off, and after you touch it at any time.
Make sure it covers both your nose, mouth and chin.
When you take off a mask, store it in a clean plastic bag, and every day either wash it if it’s a fabric mask, or dispose of a medical mask in a trash bin.
The role of the media in informing and educating its audiences has not only been achieved through traditional reporting but more recently through fact-checking claims that have dubitable character and may have the propensity to misinform and mislead. This study, through interviews, established the critical role fact-checking is playing in sanitizing the information ecosystem of polluted information in Ghana. While on one hand these media houses seek to ensure that the general public is served with factual information, there are challenges they are confronted with on the other hand – easy access to information, funding and political ownership of some of the media organisations – being some of them. The study recommends that the media should, in the face of the highlighted challenges, make fact-checking an integral part of the newsroom architecture separate from investigative journalism and other genres of reporting.
Introduction
The information ecosystem has become convoluted with an avalanche of messages shaped and contorted along the lines of propaganda, fabrications, satires, and memes. Digital media has become the dumping site for predators who share information that baits readers but are bereft of facts and sometimes lacking authenticity (Pangrazio, 2018).
Often, information shared on digital media platforms travel far and wide across the globe and media audiences rarely consume such messages by first subjecting them to a second check to ascertain their truth or falsity. Coupled with the ease of access to such media platforms, users find new media as a safe haven for propagating misinformation and fake content; and eventually, the site has become a breeding ground for fake news.
The advantages of using digital media – unrestricted access, low cost of entry, and the advantage of ‘multi-mediality’ – make it user-friendly, thus eliminating all potential barriers that will preclude a user from sharing information at any time and anywhere. While digital media provides these positives, the challenges associated with it, particularly the preponderance of fake news in the ecosystem, is often a worry to many, such as consumers of media messages, policy makers and even governments. Indeed, the prevalence of polluted information and fake news on digital media has implications on governance, human security, businesses, the environment and more recently the health sector.
For example, with the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, the fatalities that have been recorded and ones being recorded in the second wave of the pandemic have made everyone edgy and willing, without often questioning, to latch on any drug or herbs that portend to fight the virus, all in an effort not to be killed by the disease. From the origin of the virus, through to the behavior of the virus and the debate about its mode of transmission to the point of a medication to treat the virus are all riddled in fake information, thus making many people feel their faith to be hanging in the balance and struggling to determine what information is worth believing.
In a recent presidential and parliamentary elections held in Ghana, social media platforms – WhatsApp, Twitter and Facebook – went buzzing from one allegation to another from the camps of the two main political parties jostling for power – New Patriotic Party (NPP) and Nation Democratic Congress (NDC). Committed to ensuring that the voters are well informed on policies, projects and programmes being promised by the political parties, the media, popularly referred to as the fourth estate of the realm, took up the responsibility of not only reporting the news as it breaks but went further to defuse fake information in the public sphere by fact-checking statements made by political party officials on campaign platforms and political talk shows in the media.
To enhance understanding on the role the media played in battling the fake news canker, this report places the spotlight on the media organisations that were at the forefront of combating fake news especially during the election period. A profile of the media organisations, mode of fact-checking, rating scales used, tools for fact-checking, impact of their work, challenges they encounter, and the sustainability plan for the fact-checking exercise are the key outlines that this report seeks to highlight.
Focal persons in the selected media organisations were interviewed on the thematic areas that the report seeks to address. In all, five media houses – Citi FM, Joy FM, Starr FM, 3FM and Ghanaweb – were selected for the interview. The selected media houses were at the frontline of combating misinformation and fake news where fact-checking was either part of the station’s programming or of a project initiated to be executed within a specified time frame.
Profile of the Media Organisations
Citi FM
Citi FM is a private radio station based in Accra-Ghana, which commenced commercial broadcasting in November 2004. The station employs English as its medium of communication and offers a blend of adult contemporary music, news, and talk programmes. The station has a dominant presence in Greater Accra, Eastern, Central and parts of Volta and Western Regions in Ghana and aims at a global reach as online radio. In 2006, the station was also adjudged the New Radio Station of the year at the BBC Africa Radio Awards for West Africa in August 2016.
Joy FM
Joy FM is a radio station based in Accra. It was Ghana’s first English-speaking private radio station, established in 1995 as the country’s news and entertainment hub. Many private radio outlets followed after. Joy FM targets the middle to upper income group of listeners. The station’s format consists of news and talk programming interspersed with entertaining music programs.
Joy FM is one of the country’s most patronised radio stations. It is part of the Multimedia Broadcasting Limited, one of Ghana’s biggest private media groups that cover radio, digital TV & Online
Starr FM
Starr 103.5 FM is an urban, lifestyle radio station, which focuses on the delivery of compelling programmes through good music, entertainment/lifestyle – led talk programmes and sports for its target audience. In respect of News and Current affairs, it seeks to deliver accurate, factual, relevant and newsworthy stories to its listeners. It seeks to entertain and educate the target listeners through music and talk content that it puts on air, through its events and promotions. Starr is part of the Excellence in Broadcasting media group that has TV and online presence. (https://e4impact.org/partners/starr-103-5-fm/).
3FM
3FM is a privately owned radio station in Accra, the capital of Ghana. The radio station is owned by Media General Radio Limited which forms part of Media General, a media and Communications Company which owns several television and radio stations in Ghana (https://onlineradiobox.com/gh/3/).
Ghanaweb
GhanaWeb is a comprehensive resource about Ghana. It’s a website on information, news and entertaining content. In 1999 the website was renamed as GhanaWeb from formerly being known as GhanaHomePage. The owning company of the website is Bellaart Investments B.V., a privately owned company that is operating from The Netherlands.
In the last decade, GhanaWeb’s profile has risen in Ghana. Initially, the webpage consisted of some pages with information about Ghana but it quickly has evolved and expanded into a platform which is used by thousands of contributors to publish their content.
In a survey by Goodman AMC, GhanaWeb was mentioned as a media news source that Ghanaians would trust to provide first-hand and reliable information in the 2016 presidential election (http://ghana.mom-rsf.org/en/media/detail/outlet/ghanaweb/).
Fact-checking: Processes adopted by the media
The resources for fact-checking are usually claims or statements made in public spaces that lend themselves to verification. Often, such statements may have gone viral, thus dividing opinion and creating doubts in the minds of media consumers about the authenticity of the claim. Explaining the processes his media organisation adopted in fact-checking a claim, the first respondent (R1) interviewed asserted that identification of a claim that is worth fact-checking is the first step in the process.
‘The process starts by first identifying a claim, then we conduct research on what we have by speaking to experts where expert advice is needed so we get proper and professional insight into the issues that have engaged public attention,’ R1 said.
Having done fact-checking for six years, respondent one affirmed that the initial process of identifying what claim ought to be fact-checked is the first hurdle that must be crossed after thorough investigations are done on the statements to ascertain the factual basis of the claim.
‘Identifying the claim is one step of the process but beyond this step, I do a thorough investigation by consulting other resources mostly online to help me establish the facts that support or debunk the claim’.
The processes as highlighted by the respondents align with the processes for fact-checking as outlined by Dubawa, one of only two full-time fact-checking organisations in Ghana. According to Dubawa, fact-checking involves a five-step process: (a) Choosing the claim(s) (b) Assigning to a team of independent researchers (c) Researching the claim (d) Writing the report (e) Editing with skepticism and then (f) Publishing. These processes ultimately drive and guide researchers and fact-checkers in conducting their investigations.
On his part, respondent 4 (R4) argues that in as much as most of the claims are already being discussed in the public domain, which he calls demand driven, claims can also be supply- driven, where the researcher finds information worth being fact-checked and then shares its findings with the public.
‘For me, identification of a claim is either demand-driven or supply-driven. If the issues are topical and have engaged a lot of public discussions, often with no clear lines as to where the truth lies, I pick the story and conduct my own investigations. I speak to experts, if the issues will need experts to explain it better for the understanding of all. In this case, the issues are already in the public domain so the public may be craving to know what the truth is. Instances of such nature in the fact checking process is what I call demand-driven.
However, there are instances where the issues may not have necessarily been a highly debated issue in the public domain, but what I do is that I bring up the issues I consider worth informing the public about, by providing additional information through my research. Sometimes I pick the budget and I dissect the issues and supply the public with additional information in order for them to have an enhanced understanding of it,’ R4.
Respondent four (R4) however has a different approach in identifying his claims as compared to other respondents. The processes involved in investigating a claim according to this respondent are similar to what is outlined by Dubawa as a standard process to follow in fact-checking.
Again, according to Politifact, an organisation that fact-checks political claims, researchers must ask themselves the following questions in arriving at a claim they are convinced it is worth fact-checking:
Is the statement rooted in a fact that is verifiable?
Is the statement leaving a particular impression that may be misleading?
Is the statement significant?
Is the statement likely to be passed on and repeated by others?
Would a typical person hear or read the statement and wonder if it is true?
Is the statement newsworthy
And sometimes, driven by curiosity, we pick a statement to fact check.
These processes appear generally standardized in the two fact-checking organisations actively involved in fact-checking claims and the processes adopted by the media organisations at the forefront of fact-checking in Ghana are not at variance to what is considered to be standard.
Fact-checking: Resources for Researchers
Fact-checkers decide the available tools to deploy to help them achieve their goal and which best will serve their purpose. Often, the internet has been a major resource for these fact-checkers. Online software applications have assisted these fact-checkers to interrogate, analyse, and verify images, videos and statements of facts, and expose misleading ones all in an effort to present reliable information for the consumption of the public.
Respondent three (R3) holds the opinion that ‘for most of the information we fact-check, we rely on the internet to gather additional information to confirm or debunk a claim being subjected to verification. Some of the tools we use are just to check whether an image used to tell a story is a true representation of what it purports to communicate or rather it tends to mislead the public instead’.
Corroborating the position of respondent three (R3), respondent one (R1) alludes to the use of other manual resources such as reports and hard copy documents to facilitate their work.He makes the point that ‘often, getting information to verify a claim is a very tedious exercise and one will have to scan through voluminous documents in search of facts and figures sometimes’.
While many of the resources have been the use of documentary evidence to authenticate the veracity of a claim or otherwise, opinions of professionals in a particular field of study or a specialized sector in governance and administration have also been relied on by fact-checkers to get expert opinion on a claim under scrutiny.
‘Where necessary, we speak to professionals who have expert knowledge on a claim we are investigating. In issues like health, we speak to professionals who share insightful thoughts that informs our decisions in rating our claims’, says respondent 2.
Fact-Checking: Rating of Claims
Fact-checking is aimed at confirming a claim as true or otherwise. In doing so, fact-checkers are guided by some form of indicators to pass a verdict after a thorough investigation of a claim. Generally, respondents make the point that a claim may be false or true, ‘however, there are instances where the claim may not be wholly true nor false and it is in that instance that we may say it is either partly true or even sometimes misleading, depending on what we find out’, says respondent five (R5).
To assist fact-checkers arrive at a conclusion and pass a verdict on their searches, Dubawa has a documentary guide which is often relied on by its researchers as a guide in making a conclusive statement upon interrogation of a claim. The scale as designed by Dubawa and often adopted by the media organisations has five (5) categories:
True – A fact-check is deemed true when all elements of such a claim pertain to factual information.
False – A fact-check is deemed false when all elements of such a claim do not pertain to factual information at the time of assertion. In essence, manipulated and fabricated content will be considered false.
Mostly True – A fact-check is deemed mostly true when some elements of such claim pertain to factual information. Usually, this rating will be assigned to fact-checks with three or more claims.
Mostly False – A fact-check is deemed mostly false when some elements of such claim do not pertain to factual information at the time of assertion, while an element may be true. Usually, this rating will be assigned to fact-checks with three or more claims.
Misleading – A fact-check is deemed misleading when elements of a claim are too complex to be termed true or false. This could mean two things:
More Context Needed/ Wrong Context – when the claim(s) oversimplifies complex issues. On a surface level, these may seem correct but they are either used out-of-context or depict an unintended meaning
Insufficient Evidence – when the claim(s) is unverifiable; usually pertaining to urban myths or unquantifiable data
These scales of measurement are amply manifested in the claims published by the media organisations. Ultimately, combating fake news involves taking a stance on a statement one is investigating based on the facts that speak to the claim. Unlike mainstream journalism, the reporter is restrained from expressing their opinions, except in opinion editorials. It is again instructive to observe that in fact-checking, as against mainstream reporting, verification of claims is a posteriori, where statements and claims become subject of verification after publication.
Fact-Checking: Impact on Society
Respondents allude to three main indicators that point to the impact of fact-checking on media audiences:
Public’s interest in fact-checking
Consciousness of political actors in making public statements
Media discussions on fact-checked information
Public’s interest in fact-checking
Respondents allude to incidents of members of the general public calling newsrooms to put forward claims they have come across to be fact-checked for them. According to R1, who has worked as a fact-checker and researcher in his media organisation for the past five years, this phenomenon was unknown in the past.
‘Sometimes, you get a call and someone tells you he/she has seen a statement on another media platform and they will want you to verify the authenticity of the claim in the statement. In the 2016 elections especially, though I was doing some form of fact checking, I never had calls from the public requesting I fact-check a claim they have come across with. This I view as a milestone and a recognition of the work we are doing as a media house in informing the public with accurate information,’ R1 said.
The assertion made by R1 is corroborated by R3 who says ‘we get attacked by the public for some of the verdicts we make after our findings. Especially with party followers, they insult you and attack your level of objectivity. The keenness with which the public follow our work and even criticize us show the level of enthusiasm with which they follow this exercise’.
Media content, has in recent times been taken with doubt by media audiences (UNESCO, 2018). The growing interest in fact-checking by the general public shows a level of interest by audiences in media messages that are factual and accurate. Given that the preponderance of fake news in media spaces was chipping away the confidence of audiences in the media, the growing interest in fact-checking points to a revival of interest in media content.
Consciousness of political actors in making public statements
The apparent consciousness being exercised by politicians in their public utterances during the 2020 presidential and parliamentary elections especially was a positive indication, according to R4 of the impact fact-checking is having in the political arena. He asserts that ‘somehow, politicians were careful with their choice of words and they will often remark that they need to speak well before they are taken on by the media’.
This assertion by R4 is re-echoed by R1 and R3 who share similar observations of how one hardly finds political party officials and key leaders of a political group making statements that they may not be able to substantiate when subjected to strict scrutiny. R3 however observed that though politicians exercised some caution in their public utterances, such responses were not reflected on online platforms where some of the political parties have followers or individuals aligned to a political party and its ideologies.
The assertion by R3 confirms the widely held view by scholars that fake news is most prevalent in echo-chambers (Yusuf, Al-Banawi & Al-Imam, 2014) where members who share the same political ideologies re-echo claims by other members of the group. The members in this group or chamber believe in and hold on to statements that align with their biases and any other information contrary to their beliefs is discounted.
According to extant literature (Flaxman, Goel & Rao, 2016), echo-chambers have become a breeding ground for fake news and members are so loyal to one another such that information that stands at variance to their beliefs are treated with contempt.
Media discussions on fact-checked information
According to R4 ‘our ratings on a claim based on the findings we make were sometimes used as content for political talk programmes on radio especially and on other media platforms. Even on social media, shares we have for our fact-checked stories indicate that people do not just read but rebroadcast our findings for others to know about the truth or the falsity of a viral claim’.
The selected media for this study were at the forefront of combating fake news with verifiable facts. The media houses devoted a considerable number of hours in their programming schedule for airing of fact-checked materials to the general public. The premium placed on this exercise was again manifested by the publication of fact-checked information on all media platforms – online, radio and television – managed by the media organisation.
‘My works are often published on our online portal but beyond that, it is sometimes used as part of content in our political programmes during the elections as well as television programmes on our networks. Other media houses even call to interview me on a particular findings I have come up with during a key political show or get published on online spaces’, says R1.
As a key actor in the development process, the media’s role in informing and educating largely strengthens efforts of the government in achieving its developmental goals. More so, the role it is playing in combating fake news in the information ecosystem will contribute to ensuring that messages that are circulated in public spaces are sacrosanct and devoid of falsehood. This will be a rallying point in engaging the citizenry in all developmental and decision making activities at all levels of the governance structure.
Fact-Checking: Challenges of Media Organisations
Challenges as encountered by the media organisations included difficulty in accessing information from official sources, unwillingness of public officials to speak on a subject, lack of adequate funding, and lack of interest by editors to publish stories and political ownership of media houses.
‘One of the challenges I have doing this work has come from within. Sometimes editors will drop a story for fear of the media house being aligned to one political party or the other. Sometimes your story is not published at all and no explanations come even when you follow up. Though this was a challenge for a long time, gradually my works on fact-checking are being published on our platform,’ R1 recounted.
Corroborating this assertion, R4 also indicates that ‘sometimes you belong to a media house where the owner of the business is aligned to one political party. Often, such a media house does not take kindly to doing works that tend to undermine their course.’
This revelation brings to the fore the impact of media ownership on programming in media organisations. Media ownership and control has often been cited as a development that undermines the independence of the media. According to Petković (2004), media owners are in a position to influence media content, and the mere possibility that they would choose to exert such influence justifies the need for restrictions in the exercise of their authority on the media they control. Petković argues that their motives may be political, ideological, personal or commercial, but the outcome is the same – influence on content.
In Ghana, it is a common phenomenon that media organisations that are known to be aligned to major political parties broadcast news content that re-echo the position of the party and any other information that tends to put the political party in a bad light is often not given air space on their platforms.
Again, other challenges such as access to information and the willingness of government officials to speak on an issue being fact-checked has been a common hurdle that media organisations are confronted with on a daily basis. Respondent 5 recounts the frustrations they have to go through to get information from official sources to do professional work. ‘The nature of the work requires that you counter false information with the truth. In situations where you cannot get the supporting document to debunk a claim for instance, you are forced to drop the story rather than repeating what will turn out to be a lie instead’.
Fact-Checking: Sustainability Plan by Media Organisations
For the media houses, there are no policies by way of documentation on the sustainability plan for integrating fact-checking into the main scheme of work of the organisations. Fact-checking was most prominent an exercise during the election period and most of the media houses though have not abandoned the exercise, much attention has been shifted to mainstream reporting.
According to R2, his media house has not set up a desk dedicated to fact-checking as against other genres such as sports, entertainment, politics etc. Though this is non-existent, fact-checking has been accepted as one of the tasks the newsroom performs and fact-checked stories are published once work is completed on the verification of a claim.
Respondent 2 further asserts that ‘the media organisation has not set up any desk purposely focusing on fact-checking. After some training, I enrolled as a trainee fact-checker, I took up the challenge and has since been doing fact-checking for the organisation. In order to ensure that my absence does not spell the end of fact-checking in my organisation, I have started training one junior reporter to build his capacity to take up the work in future. The institution has not as a matter of policy, set up a specialized desk that is solely dedicated to fact checking’.
Respondent one alludes to the fact that his media organisation had no place for fact-checking until he took it up in addition to his daily routine reporting duties. He argues that the lack of specialized desks as in the case of other genres of reporting in the newsroom tends to jeopardize the existence of fact-checking in the media.
‘I took up the challenge of fact-checking as a journalist and initially it was not well embraced within my media set up perhaps it is something new there. However, overtime with the kind of tractions we get when we publish such stories, my organisation has made it a core part of reporting. Though there is no special desk like a fact checking desk, the recognition of fact-checking is for me a commitment by the organisation to see it as part of our portfolio of reporting,’ R1 said.
Though the evidence points to lack of a clear sustainability plan by the media organisations to maintain fact-checking as a specialized desk in the newsroom, its integration into news reporting shows a level of commitment by the media organisations to maintain the exercise as part of mainstream reporting.
Conclusion
The media and media messages are critical in shaping opinions of media audiences. As a conduit for informing and educating, the role of fact-checking aimed at authenticating claims in order to inform and educate the populace is a step that is believed to advance the cause of democracy and development of a country.
To the extent that fake news has brought about many individuals being misled and losing confidence in media messages, fact-checking statements in the public domain and reporting accordingly will not only purge the media of the tag of a machinery being exploited to propagate falsehood and other misleading claims but rather as a trustworthy agent for development.
Consensus keeps building between the media and the general public that the way to ensuring that the information ecosystem is devoid of fake news is by adopting fact-checking as a needed intervention for not only addressing the challenges that fake news poses but to serve as a discouragement for individuals who may want to use fake information to prosecute their agenda.
Again, the gradual shifting of fact-checking into the arena of journalistic practice in Ghana is a response to advocacy by stakeholders for the media to take the lead in removing the canker of fake news in public discourse. The evidence of fact-checking being embraced by media organisations largely signifies steps being taken to address the challenge head on.
Recommendations
The study recommends the following as steps to ensuring that the media is empowered to continue combating fake information circulating in public spaces:
There is the need for the media and civil society organisations to demand full implementation in compliance of the information law in Ghana. This will help address challenges researchers encounter in their effort to access public documents to assist in their work;
The media must create special and adequately resourced desks for fact-checking as part of their commitment to combating fake news in the information ecosystem.
Regulatory bodies like the Ghana Journalists Association (GJA) must regularly engage media owners and editors to sensitize them to the need to commit to ensuring the independence of journalists plying their trade in a media organisation.
