This guide provides a framework for journalists to compile in-depth reports on any topic by ensuring that all they write is based on verifiable facts.
Reporting on contentious issues
All reporting requires evidence and facts, and this is particularly important when dealing with contentious issues that have active and vocal groups pushing political and commercial agendas.
By focusing on data, documentation, eye witness accounts, and expert testimony, reporters can maintain professional integrity and ensure their work is driven by facts rather than outside influences and vested interests.
In other areas of Media Helping Media we have looked at where the language we use, our own conscious and unconscious bias, and personal affiliations and emotions can distort the news we produce.
It’s important for journalists to deal with those issues because there will always be those who want to play on them. And to defend our journalism against others and our own failings with where evidence-based reporting comes in.
Prioritise nouns and verbs over adjectives
Adjectives are often the primary vehicles for bias because they describe the reporter’s perception of an event rather than the event itself. Evidence-based reporting relies on the hard data that adjectives often obscure. See our article on the use of adjectives and adverbs in news reporting.
Here are some common examples:
- In politics:
- Instead of: The candidate gave an inspiring speech.
- Evidence-based: The candidate’s speech was met with a standing ovation from the crowd of 400.
- In business:
- Instead of: The company’s disastrous quarterly results.
- Evidence-based: The company’s quarterly profits fell by 30% compared to last year.
- Reasoning:
- Nouns and verbs provide verifiable information that allows the audience to form their own conclusions based on the evidence presented.
Use attribution as a tool for verification
Whenever a source makes a claim, the journalist must act as an evidence-gatherer and fact-checker. Use verbs that describe the act of speaking without implying whether the statement is true or false, while always seeking the data to back it up. See our article on attribution and referencing.
- Attribution verbs:
- stated, said, added, noted, outlined, maintained.
- Note we didn’t add claimed, which adds an element of doubt.
- Avoiding presumption:
- Avoid verbs like revealed or pointed out, which suggest the journalist has already accepted the source’s claim as an absolute truth before presenting the evidence.
- Example:
- “The Minister stated (attribution) the policy is working,” followed immediately by, “Government figures show a 5% increase in employment (evidence).”
The weight of evidence v false balance
Evidence-based reporting does not mean giving exactly equal time to two opposing views if one is backed by overwhelming data and the other is not. Your duty is to the evidence, not to a 50/50 split of opinions. See our article about false equivalence and false balance.
- The principle: If 90% of data points toward one conclusion, it is a failure of evidence-based reporting to present a marginal theory as equally valid.
- In practice: Report the consensus and acknowledge the dissenting view by citing exactly what evidence (or lack of) they are using: “While the majority of [Experts] cite X data as proof, a minority of [Group] disputes this, based on Y.”
The third-person perspective
To keep the focus on the evidence, the journalist should be an invisible observer. Removing personal pronouns ensures the audience evaluates the facts of the story rather than the personality of the writer.
- Instead of: “I observed the infrastructure was in poor condition.”
- Evidence-based: “The bridge survey conducted by [Organisation] identifies structural cracks in three pillars.”
- Reasoning: Evidence-based reporting shifts the authority from the reporter’s eye to verifiable records.
- Exceptions: There are exceptions to this rule, often witnessed in live two-way reports on breaking and developing news stories between a correspondent and a presenter of a TV programme. “I counted them all out and I counted them all back” is a famous phrase used by BBC correspondent Brian Hanrahan during the 1982 Falklands War.
Defining complex terminology through evidence
Every discipline has jargon. When you define a term, do so using factual language that describes the mechanism or the data behind it. See our article about clichés, jargon, and journalese.
- In economics: Define the word ‘austerity’ as reductions in government spending intended to reduce a budget deficit, rather than cuts to essential public services. If essential public services are cut, this will become clear as you investigate which areas the budget reductions will affect. Only when you have evidence can you pinpoint what and who will be affected.
- In science: Define ‘the greenhouse effect’ as the process by which certain gases trap thermal energy in the atmosphere. Do this at the first mention of the term in an article.
The evidence-based audit
Before submitting a story, perform this verification check:
- The adjective test: Have I used any words that tell the reader how to feel, or have I provided the numbers that show why the situation is significant?
- The source test: Is every opinion clearly linked to a specific person, and have I provided the evidence they are using to support their claim?
- The headline test: Does the headline summarise the primary evidence-based finding, or is it designed to provoke an emotional response?
- The context test: Have I placed the current event within a historical or statistical context (e.g., comparing current prices to a five-year average)?
Evidence-verification worksheet
To help you apply the above we have designed an evidence-verification worksheet. It’s designed to ensure journalists avoid a campaigning or subjective approach and instead apply evidence-based reporting. By systematically vetting sources and data points before the writing process begins, you ensure the integrity of your story.
Source credibility
For every primary source or interviewee, answer the following to ensure the reporting remains grounded in expertise rather than opinion. See our article on developing and handling news sources and our piece introduction to interviewing.
- Who is the source? (Name, title, and institutional affiliation)
- What is their area of evidence? (Are they an expert in the specific field they are discussing, or are they speaking outside their professional scope?)
- What is their motivation? (Does this source stand to gain financially or politically from the claims they are making?)
- Can the claim be corroborated? (Is there a second, independent source who can confirm the same facts?)
Data and documentation
Before including a statistic or a fact, verify the origin of the data to avoid repeating unverified claims. See our article data journalism – resources and tools.
- What is the original source of the data? (e.g., a government report, a peer-reviewed study, or a press release from an NGO?)
- How recent is the information? (Is this the most up-to-date data available, or has it been superseded by more recent findings?)
- What was the methodology? (For example, if it is a poll, how many people were asked? If it is a scientific study, was it peer-reviewed?)
- Are there conflicting data sets? (If another reputable body has different figures, have you noted this discrepancy?)
The language audit
Review your draft or notes to ensure the tone remains focused on the evidence rather than emotional or persuasive language.
- Replace emotive adjectives with data: Instead of using subjective descriptors such as shocking, disgraceful, or appalling, provide the specific numbers or data points that demonstrate the scale of the issue.
- Remove personal perspective: Rephrase any sentences using I, me, or my to focus exclusively on the documented event or the evidence-based findings.
- Neutralise characterisation:
- Avoid portraying sources as heroes, villains, or victims.
- Use neutral attribution verbs such as stated, maintained, or outlined to present their contributions.
- Focus headlines on findings: Ensure the headline summarises the primary evidence-based discovery of the story rather than using language designed to trigger fear, anger, or excitement.
- Check for loaded verbs: Ensure you have not used verbs like admitted (which implies guilt) or pointed out (which implies the reporter agrees it is a fact) when a neutral said or stated is more appropriate for evidence-based distance.
Visual evidence verification
When using charts, maps, or photographs to support your reporting, verify that they are not being used out of context.
- Is the visual representative? Does a photo of a single dry field accurately represent the state of an entire province?
- Is the scale of the graph accurate? Does the graph start at zero to avoid exaggerating a minor trend?
Final sign-off
Before filing your story, tick these three boxes:
- [ ] Every significant claim is attributed to a source.
- [ ] All data has been checked against the original source document.
- [ ] No loaded adjectives remain in the lead paragraph (or anywhere in the article).
Conclusion
Evidence-based reporting is one of the most effective ways to build a reputation for reliability. By letting the evidence lead the narrative, you provide a service that empowers your audience with facts.
Related material
