A guide how to correct or dispute Myth Detector’s ratings on Facebook

In 2016, Facebook launched a Third-Party Fact-Checking program in collaboration with independent fact-checking organizations to improve the accuracy of information posted on its platform. On September 21, 2020, Facebook expanded the program to Georgia, under which Myth Detector and FactCheck (FactCheck Georgia) became its local partners. These organizations are verified members of the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) of the Poynter Institute.

After identifying content that contains potentially incorrect information on Facebook, the fact-checking organizations participating in the program evaluate and label the dubious content through the Facebook rating system, which includes the following ratings:

  1. False
  2. Altered
  3. Partly false
  4. Missing context
  5. Satire
  6. True

It is noteworthy that Facebook imposes certain restrictions on individual accounts or publishers (Facebook page, Facebook group) distributing content rated as the first 4 categories (false, altered, partly false, missing context) by Myth Detector and Fact-Check (FactCheck Georgia), which may include restrictions on the dissemination of such content. In the event of repeated identical infringement by the same publishers, Facebook may take additional measures: reduce distribution and reach of the mentioned publisher, limit the ability of advertising and monetization, etc.

Is it possible to review the rating by the fact-checking organizations?

There are two ways to review the rating of a content:

1. Correction of a content. If you agree with the rating given to the content you have shared/published, you can make corrections to the inaccuracies given the due prominence, which means clearly correcting the spread incorrect content, including the title, on the same link as the initial material was disseminated. After the correction, we will remove the initial rating on Facebook.

See detailed instructions for issuing a correction
See the application of correction

2. Dispute a rating. If you disagree with the rating, you can dispute it, after which we will consider your arguments and decide whether to revoke the rating or uphold it.

See detailed instructions for disputing a rating
See the application of complain

Who can apply?

Interested parties – individual accounts or publishers (Facebook page, group), who are directly responsible for the dubious content and its distribution, can contact us and request correction or dispute of the rating of its content.

What are the deadlines for issuing a dispute or a correction?

Interested parties – can apply to the editorial board of Myth Detector within 10 working days after the rating has been given to the content published on Facebook. Complaints submitted after this deadline will not be considered.

In what time frame will we react?

  • After correcting the source content, with due prominence and informing the Myth Detector about it, the rating will be reviewed immediately or no later than 2 working days.
  • In case of a dispute of the rating, the Myth Detector will give a reasoned answer within 7 working days and will make a decision on revising the rating or leaving it unchanged.

What is meant by corrections with due prominence?

Corrections with the due prominence involve clearly informing the reader of a mistake by making changes to the same link on which the original content was distributed. The correction should be made in both the title and the description and it should be clearly explained what changes have been made to the original content.

NB! Do not delete the rated content, be it a Facebook post or information posted on the website, otherwise the restrictions imposed by Facebook on you will remain in force and we will not be able to change the rating labeled


Media Development Foundation (MDF) is accountable to the public. We consider complaints which are made under the Code of Conduct of Myth Detector.

“Myth Detector’s” editorial board gives an opportunity to all interested parties to submit a substantiated complaint about the inaccuracies in the materials. Interested parties may fill in an online form, address us via email ([email protected] or [email protected]), Facebook or other social media and provide us with a comment related to a material and a substantiated complaint about an inaccuracy or error therein.

Editorial board examines the complaint in a timely manner and informs the parties of its decision. In case of an inaccuracy or an error, corrections will be made immediately in all possible formats.

Grammatical or mechanical errors (spelling), which essentially do not affect the reader’s perception of the story, will be corrected directly in the text.

In the event of an essential error, the editorial board will apologize to the reader and make a correction note in the introductory section of the article, explaining, wherever possible, in detail the cause of the error and clearly identifying the new facts and circumstances that have arisen.

If the development of the events substantially changes the content of the article, an update will be posted at the beginning of the article, indicating the current actual circumstances. The correction will be disseminated in the same format and channels as the original.

Myth Detector declares its full commitment to the code of principles elaborated by the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) of the Poynter Institute, as a verified signature since November 2019.

Sending Complaints to IFCN

If you believe that  Myth Detector is violating the Code of Principles, you can inform the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN), and it will review your claims. The IFCN is not an appeals body but has the responsibility to suspend or withdraw signatory status if it finds a signatory has seriously violated the code. You can submit your claim to the complaints page on the IFCN site:

Sending Complaints to EFCSN

“Myth Detector” follows the European Code of Standards, which is a set of criteria designed to ensure that organisations fact-checking mis- and disinformation adhere to the highest standards of methodology, ethics and transparency in order to best serve the public interest.

In accordance with Article 6 of the European Code of Standards, any individual or organisation that believes that a member of the European Fact-Checking Standards Network significantly failed to fulfil the requirements of the Code, if the complaint is not satisfied by the organisation concerned, can submit a complaint to the European Fact-Checking Standards Network for evaluation by the Governance Body.

The Governance Body won’t examine issues related to a single publication unless it consists of a significant breach of the requirements of the Code.

The complaint must be submitted through the following specific form available here

For more information on the process, see the following link


Corrected Articles



Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Add New Playlist