Worked example · English · Year 10

Analysing fake news

DCF: Producing → Evaluating and improving digital content

What this is

A completed grid, check list and rewrite for the Llanbedr bridge stimulus. It doubles as your mark scheme. Show it after pupils have finished the grid — the second column is the part they will otherwise copy.

The completed evaluation grid

Question Report A — Chronicle Report B — Llanbedr Voice Report C — aggregator
Who wrote it?Nia Hopkin, local democracy reporter — a named person with a named job"Admin". No person is accountable for it"NewsWalesDaily" — an account name, not a journalist
When?14 March 06:00, updated 11:20. It shows its correctionsNo date at all, so you cannot tell what it knew when15 March 21:47 — a day after the council statement it says does not exist
Where do the numbers come from?The council's highways report, published 12 March: 8 weeks, £1.4m, 4km, £900k grant"Up to 80%" and "four times worse" are attributed to nobody£14m, two years, 40km — sourced to "local reports"
Most emotive phrase"Nobody wants an eight-week closure in spring" — and it is in quotation marks, attributed to a councillor"THEY ARE CLOSING OUR BRIDGE AND NOBODY ASKED YOU""cut in half"
Are people who disagree quoted?Yes — Sioned Pugh fears a third off takings, two other traders expect little changeNo. Two anonymous residents who agree with each otherNo named person at all
Is the image what it claims?No image usedNo image usedNo — it is a 2016 stock photograph of a bridge in Yorkshire, captioned "The Old Bridge yesterday"
One provably false claimNone found. Every figure is traceable to the published report"The council refused to comment" — Cllr Rees gave a quotation on 13 March"Bridge collapses" — the inspection found cracking; the bridge is still open to pedestrians
Trust score /54 — sourced, dated, both sides, shows an update. Not perfect: only three traders were asked1 — no date, no author, no sources, one provably false claim0 — false headline, stolen photograph, and every figure inflated tenfold

Evidences criteria 1 and 2: all three are judged on the same eight questions, and every cell quotes words or numbers rather than describing the writer's motives.

Five things I would check next

What I would checkWhere
Whether the inspection report really says eight weeks and £1.4mBryn Hir Council's website — Report A says it was published on 12 March, so it should be findable
Whether the photograph in Report C is of the Old BridgeA reverse image search; also compare it with any picture on the council's page
Whether the council commented before 15 MarchThe council's press releases, and Report A's 13 March quotation from Cllr Rees
Whether any other outlet reports a collapseBBC News Wales and one other regional outlet — a collapsed bridge would not be covered by one aggregator alone
Where Report B's "80% of businesses" figure comes fromAsk the site for its source; check whether any trade body or council survey exists. A statistic with no origin is not a statistic

Evidences criterion 4: each check is something a pupil could genuinely do in ten minutes, and the place to do it is named.

The accurate rewrite of Report C

Headline: Eight-week closure for cracked Llanbedr bridge — but walkers and cyclists can still cross

The Old Bridge over the Afon Wen will shut to vehicles from Monday 25 March for about eight weeks while two cracked arches are repaired, according to a highways report published by Bryn Hir Council on 12 March. The council puts the cost at £1.4m, £900,000 of it from a Welsh Government transport grant, and says the diversion between Llanbedr-ar-Fryn and Pentre Isaf will add roughly 4km to a journey. The bridge has not collapsed and stays open to people on foot and on bicycles. Traders disagree about the impact: one bakery owner told the Llanbedr Chronicle takings could fall by a third, while two other businesses expected little change. The consultation closes on 21 March.

What I removed, and why: I cut the word "collapses", the £14m, the two-year timescale, the 40km detour and the photograph, because the first is contradicted by the inspection, the three figures are each exactly ten times the published ones with no source given, and the picture is a 2016 stock image of a bridge in Yorkshire.

Evidences criterion 3 — two false claims (the collapse and the inflated figures) are named and corrected — and criterion 5: 120 words, every number attributed to the council or the Chronicle, and the headline still has a reason to be read.

Why this response is secure