Check by Meedan
A collaborative verification workflow for newsrooms and civil society teams, not an automatic truth detector.
Only approved or redacted sensitive material
Do not route confidential source material into a public-tip workflow until consent, access control, deletion, and escalation procedures are documented.
Check by Meedan
A shared workspace in a browser where a team logs public claims, assigns them and tracks verification status.
First thing to tryEnter three invented public claims on a test instance, assign one to yourself, attach one public link, change its status, then delete it.
CostThe code costs nothing to self-host, but your organisation must supply the person who runs and patches the server, and hosted access is arranged with Meedan rather than bought at a listed price.
Do this with it
Verification
Public material only
Build a verification checklist for a claim
15 minutes · Gives you a checklist · Works on a phone
Answer in [ANSWER LANGUAGE], even if the material below is in another language. I have a claim I cannot verify yet. Do NOT tell me whether it is true, and do not estimate how likely it is. I need a plan for checking it. Rules: 1. Give no verdict. Do not write "probably", "likely", "appears genuine" or any other judgement of the claim. 2. Do not perform the checks. Do not search. Write the plan only. 3. Name people by type of person or institution, never by name. 4. If a check needs something I did not give you, say what it is instead of assuming it. The claim: [WRITE THE CLAIM IN ONE SENTENCE] What I have: [DESCRIBE WHAT YOU HAVE: a photo, a video, a document, a forwarded message, a screenshot] What I already know: [DATE, PLACE, WHO IS SAYING IT, WHERE IT CAME FROM] Give me, in this order: A. What would have to be true for this claim to hold, as separate testable statements. B. The checks, ordered from cheapest to most expensive, and for each one the result that would support the claim and the result that would refute it. C. What evidence would disprove the claim, and who could confirm or refute it locally, by type of person or institution and never by name. D. What cannot be checked from the material I have, including what you, as a language model, cannot check at all.
Plain verdict
Useful when a team receives many public claims or tips and needs assignments, evidence, status, and publication review in one place. It does not decide whether a claim is true.
Good for
Public-tip queues, newsroom collaboration, verification status, claim matching, and a documented handoff between researchers and editors.
Avoid for
Starting with a few occasional claims, accepting sensitive submissions before a protection workflow exists, or treating automated suggestions as verification.
Data lane
Hosted and self-hosted arrangements differ. Confirm who operates the server, which messaging integrations are connected, who can view submissions, how long data remains, and how deletion works.
Ten-minute safe trial
Use three invented public claims and stock images. Assign one item, attach one public source, change its status, and export or delete it. Do not connect a real tipline.
Human check
An editor reviews the original claim, source provenance, reverse-search results, timestamps, context, and publication language. Record what remains unknown.
Safer or constraint-based alternatives
For a small team, use a restricted spreadsheet with public claims and a written verification checklist. Keep confidential source communication in a separately approved channel.
What happens to your data
Where this data goes
- your server when self-hosted
- Meedan or integration providers when hosted
Trains on what you type?
Depends on the plan or account type.
How long it is kept
Check is a collaborative verification workflow, not a truth-detection model. Self-hosting and Meedan-hosted arrangements have different operators and integrations. Confirm the hosting agreement, tipline channel, retention, and staff access before accepting sensitive submissions.
Account required
- An email address
Getting it, and using it in Iraq
Access in Iraq
Hosted access is relationship-based. Self-hosted software has no built-in country gate, but messaging integrations can have their own restrictions.
Language quality
No one has published a measurement for this.
Arabic (Modern Standard)
Meedan works across multilingual fact-checking contexts but publishes no task-specific Arabic or Kurdish accuracy benchmark. Support is not a measured quality result. Test a short sample with a fluent reviewer.
Iraqi Arabic
No current first-party benchmark for Iraqi Arabic was found. Test the exact dialect and task with a fluent reviewer.
Kurdish (Sorani)
No current first-party quality benchmark for Sorani was found. Do not infer quality from general multilingual claims.
Sources
- CheckMeedan
- meedan/check-apiMeedan
Last checked: 2026-09-01