How Can the GPTZero Fact Checker Support Journalism?

The very essence of journalism has always been about pursuing and revealing the truth, but these days, the meaning of what constitutes “truth” is under threat. The “rapid spread of disinformation” has been described as “one of the foremost challenges of our time” by Amanda Keton (General Counsel, Wikimedia Foundation). Misinformation has become a structural issue, with AI-generated content spreading faster than human verification can keep up. 

Here at GPTZero, our mission has always been to preserve what’s human. Our latest tool is about fact-checking at scale, and verifying claims against credible sources. This has only become more crucial in an age where content on social media platforms is only moving further away from regulation. With fewer safeguards in place, misinformation is becoming embedded into the fabric of online discourse, which has long-reaching implications for democracy itself. 

Fact-Checking is Under Threat

Fact-checking goes as far back as journalism itself, although historically, top news organizations have had their own dedicated teams to take a closer look at sources, verify claims, and make sure reporting met the required accuracy standards. This process was painstakingly manual, requiring expert human researchers to cross-reference official records, interview subject-matter experts, and confirm details with primary sources. While time-intensive, it was a necessary aspect of maintaining journalistic integrity.

The digital revolution has made information more accessible than ever, and social media has become a primary news source. Yet without proper regulation – and with algorithms prioritizing engagement above accuracy – it has muddied the lines between professional reporting, user-generated content, and deliberate misinformation campaigns. The sheer volume of content online has made it almost impossible for traditional fact-checkers to keep up. 

To deal with this, platforms brought in new mechanisms for crowdsourced fact-checking. Community Notes on X (formerly Twitter) is one of the best-known examples. First launched in 2021 as “Birdwatch,” it allows users to collaboratively assess and contextualize misleading claims. Unlike traditional fact-checking, which relies on institutional gatekeepers, Community Notes supposedly democratizes the process and allows a broad range of contributors to add their own perspectives.

Yet – in reality – Community Notes is limited by bias, inconsistent participation, and an inability to keep pace with AI-generated misinformation that can quickly go viral. In fact, a report by the Center for Countering Digital Hate has found accurate notes correcting false election claims were absent in 74% of sampled misleading posts – with the original, misleading content getting far more views than the corrective notes. This imbalance presents a fatal flaw, as once misinformation spreads, even well-intentioned corrections can struggle to reach the same audience. 

In January 2025, Meta also announced that it would stop all fact-checking on its platforms within the United States and instead put into place a user-based flagging system similar to X’s Community Notes. This is another move towards the non-regulation of content, which only intensifies any concerns about the spread of fake news on social media platforms. 

This is where AI-driven fact-checking can play a unique new role. With traditional fact-checking under threat, there is now an even greater onus on journalists to address misinformation. Yet journalists cannot be expected to carry the weight alone – technological solutions must help with reliable, scalable verification. 

Our Twitter/X fact-checking app

While we began as an AI detection tool, helping educators and institutions differentiate between human and machine-generated writing, we’ve also recognized the urgent need for verifiable truth. This is why our commitment to fact-checking comes in two parts.

First, we help users to fact-check tweets in real time. Just tag our bot to fact-check any X thread or article. Anyone can tag @GPTZeroAI and write "fact check" on any X post, and within seconds, our AI-assisted fact check kicks in to analyze the source, compare claims against credible data, and flag any inconsistencies.

This feature is free forever, built to fight back against fake news spreading on the platform. With every fact check, we're aiming to make X a little more truthful and transparent. As one user (Olivia Kusio) said: "Fact checking on X is an important problem – and this solves it!"

Also, our Source Finder detects potentially misleading claims and gives recommendations for sources that either support or contradict them. Unlike traditional AI-generated responses, it pulls from a dataset of over 220 million scholarly articles, real-time news, and public data. It does not generate opinions or take a stance but instead brings up relevant citations to help with deeper investigation.

How Does This Support Journalism?

We’ve developed these AI-driven fact-checking mechanisms to help protect the future of human journalism, in various ways: 

1. Accelerating the Fact-Checking Process

Journalists are often under crazy pressure to publish quickly (ideally first!), but verification takes time, particularly when it comes to breaking news situations. AI-powered fact-checking has the potential to immediately flag suspicious claims, allowing reporters to prioritize deeper investigation into high-risk misinformation. Instead of replacing human fact-checkers, AI serves as an intelligent triage system, spotting inconsistencies at speeds no human editorial team could match.

2. Defending Against AI-Generated Misinformation

Generative AI can now church out synthetic news articles, fake quotes, and even deepfake interviews that are hard to distinguish from authentic reporting. Traditional fact-checking methods struggle to keep up because AI can generate plausible but false narratives at an unprecedented scale. A dedicated AI fact-checker can proactively analyze AI-generated claims before they go viral.

3. Improving Trust in Media

One of the saddest aspects of misinformation is how it erodes journalistic credibility. If AI fact-checking tools are implemented with audit trails and show readers how claims were verified, they could restore public trust. Transparency is crucial, as when readers can see exactly how information was verified, they are more likely to trust the journalist and the publication. News organizations could integrate AI-powered fact-checking directly into their reporting and actually embed real-time verification insights alongside articles.

4. Helping Independent and Local Newsrooms

It goes without saying that large media outlets have the resources for dedicated fact-checking teams, whereas independent and local journalists often lack these capabilities. We hope that our Source Finder can act as a low-cost, scalable solution for smaller journalist teams, helping them to verify claims without the costs traditionally associated with that function. By democratizing access to verification tools, we hope to make verifying the truth more accessible for all journalists. 

Defending Truth in the Age of AI  

The best journalists know that their responsibility goes beyond reporting and is about upholding the integrity of information itself. The key is in thoughtfully implementing AI-assisted fact-checking, which can hopefully help reporters, strengthen public trust, and cement the role of journalism as a guardian of truth. These days, truth isn’t just something we uncover. It’s something we all have to actively work to protect.