Pre-publication News Verification Practices in Local Newsrooms. A Theoretical Approach

This chapter shifts the locus of responsibility for combating disinformation from news consumers to journalists, examining pre-publication verification practices in local newsrooms with particular attention to the Romanian context. It distinguishes Graves and Cherubini’s two fact-checking models—the resource-rich but editorially dependent newsroom model prevalent in Western Europe, and the editorially freer but underfunded non-governmental model common in Eastern Europe—and profiles Romania’s three fact-checking initiatives: Veridica, Factual, and AFP Verificat. The chapter then sets out the limitations of fact-checking, notably that corrections arrive only after falsehoods reach the public and that disinformation continues to shape attitudes even after debunking; it also flags the risk that state efforts to police “truth,” such as a contested Romanian anti-propaganda draft, can shade into censorship. Central to the argument is the distinction between fact-checking (post-dissemination) and newsroom verification (pre-publication), the latter preventing harm before it occurs but routinely undermined by time pressure, understaffing, and financial precarity. Drawing on cross-national and Romanian survey data, the chapter shows that most Romanian journalists work under medium-to-high time pressure, conditions worsened for the local press by the pandemic. It concludes that supporting independent local journalism is essential and calls for an empirical survey of local newsroom practices.