Latest Factchecks:
FACT CHECK: Are Registered Voters Being Excluded from Voting at PU 004, Wuse Zone 2?
FACT CHECK: Does APC Candidate Zakka Have “No Certificate” as Claimed by ADC’s Ogidi?
FactCheck: Did Boko Haram and ISWAP fighters pass through military checkpoints without intervention?
FactCheck: Was a man killed three days after his wedding in Katsina?
FactCheck: Did Katsina State Government approve the procurement of 30 hybrid CNG buses?
FactCheck: Did Bello Matawalle give out five of his daughters in marriage?
FactCheck: Did Kano Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf defect from NNPP to APC?
FactCheck: Was Sheikh Ahmed Gumi arrested by the US Military?
FactCheck: Did Katsina State Government close all public primary and secondary schools until further notice?
FACT SHIELD: What are the constitutional requirements to contest for governor in Nigeria?
FACT CHECK: Did BVAS glitch disrupt the voting exercise in Onitsha?
FACT CHECK: Does this video show unknown gunmen attacking security personnel during the 2025 Anambra governorship election?
FACT CHECK: Old image shared hours after opening of polls with the hashtag AnambraDecides’25
FACT CHECK: Did an Anambra LGA Chairman Disrupt Elections with Police?
FACT CHECK: Viral Video Claiming ‘Massive Influx of Cash’ in Anambra Election
FACT CHECK: Old Photo Falsely Linked to Violence in the Anambra Election
FACT CHECK: Anambra election has hardly exceeded 22% voter turnout
FACT CHECK: Did Soludo ‘Emptied Anambra Purse’ to Buy Votes for APGA?
FACT CHECK: Was there an approval to vote without a voter’s card in the 2025 Anambra guber poll?

➔ Our fact-checkers, who are active across various social media platforms, examine and identify potentially false, misleading or deceptive information. They monitor the activities of individuals and groups known for creating and spreading misleading content. These claims are then subjected to our rigorous verification process.
➔ We recognise that information disorder manifests and spreads rapidly within online spaces and in communities. This is why we engaged community champions known as “soldiers of the mouth,” who act as our eyes and ears in places where disinformation is rife. Soldiers of mouth send us information that circulates locally for fact-checking and verification. They submit these claims through our WhatsApp channel or via our Facebook page using the Meedan tool.
➔ The tool is also open to members of the public, who can access it and submit claims to us for fact-checking.
➔ This is the technical part of the fact-checking process. After a claim has been submitted, it is initially reviewed by the team to ensure it aligns with our thematic areas.
➔ Next, the verification method is determined based on the type of disinformation instrument used. The claim could be a video, an image, or a string of words posted on a website.
➔ If the claim is in video format, we use tools like the video verification plugin (InVID). Some live fact-checks, particularly during election periods, require geo-location tools and Google Earth to verify the true location of an event. For images, we use Tineye, Duplichecker, Deepware, and Google reverse image search to trace their original source. Additionally, we use tools like WHOIS to determine the origin and owner of the website where a claim was posted. We also have access to archival websites like “AllAfrica,” which contains news reports dating back to the 1980s, among many other resources. We are continuously on the lookout for newer tools that may enhance our verification process.
➔ The verification process also involves in-depth research. We thoroughly examine diverse sources and documents and speak to officials and other sources as required by the claim. In the course of our work, we have established interactions with various top government officials, embassies, and even sources outside Nigeria.
➔ After verification is completed and the verdict is determined, the fact-checker writes a detailed report. The purpose of this report is to present the verified truth and to educate the public. The fact-check report is comprehensive, including a detailed account of the verification process to validate the findings. We also ensure simplicity in our writing style, as we are aware that our primary audience is the general public. Therefore, it is essential to keep our reports clear and easily understandable.
➔ The verdict about any claim determined along the lines of true, false, misleading, no evidence and inaccurate/accurate. There are instances in which we inform our audience of “all we know,” about a particular subject matter.
➔ After the fact-checker completes the report, it is uploaded to the backend for the first round of editing by the sub-editors. During this process, additional context may be provided, or adjustments to the verdict may be made if necessary.
➔ The sub-editors then notify the editor-in-chief, who conducts a final review and gives approval for the fact-check to be published.
➔ Following evidence from the above process, Fact checkers concludes with a verdict
➔ Verdicts can include; TRUE, FALSE, True But Misleading, Misleading Headline
➔ The fact-checks are summarised into concise bits of information, which are then transformed into visual graphic designs.
➔ These designs, in addition to what has been published on the website, are shared across various social media platforms, including WhatsApp.
➔ Where applicable, the source of the disinformation is reported to ensure that the post is taken down. However, the final decision is subject to the policies and guidelines of the media platform hosting the content.
● We do not fact check opinions and projections.
● In cases where an unfolding event trends, CDD War Room would issue an explainer, to enable the public to get a clearer picture of the topic.
● Sports and entertainment issues that have no effect on the democracy or peace of West Africa are also not subjects of fact-checks.
● Religious matters, especially those related to prophecies, are not subjects for fact-checking. However, claims that pose a risk to health, peace, and democracy will be subject to in-house deliberation to decide whether it should be fact checked.






