The second question concerns the source.
Who published the information?
Is the author identified?
Does the outlet have a record of accurate reporting?
Is there a clear path to the original statement?
The third question concerns context.
Was the quotation taken from an interview, a television program, a social media post, or a memoir?
What was being discussed immediately before the statement?
Could the headline have changed its meaning?
The fourth question is about time.
When did the alleged revelation occur?
Is the article discussing a recent development or recycling older material?
The fifth is whether independent reporting exists.
Do multiple established sources confirm the same event?
Or are several websites repeating an identical unsupported account?
Finally, readers should examine their own emotional response.
Does the headline make them angry, frightened, shocked, or intensely curious before presenting evidence?
Strong emotion does not prove that a claim is false.
But it can be a useful reminder to slow down.
