earticle

영어

Fact-checking journalism has emerged as a crucial mechanism in contemporary society to enhance the quality of public discourse and hold political and social actors accountable amidst the proliferation of misinformation. Despite its significance, however, the practice of fact-checking itself has become a subject of political contention, threatening its sustainability. This paper examines the political, economic, and civil society factors threatening the sustainability of fact-check journalism by comparing and analyzing the cases of SNU Fact Check in South Korea, Rappler in the Philippines, and Chequeado in Argentina. SNU FactCheck, a platform that aimed to overcome partisan biases in Korean journalism by establishing a basis for objective factual verification through a collaborative model with various media outlets, ultimately ceased operations due to political attacks from a specific political party and the discontinuation of financial support from its main sponsor, a portal company. This case demonstrates the vulnerability of high dependence on a single funding source to changes in the political environment. Conversely, Rappler in the Philippines, despite facing systematic political oppression from an authoritarian government (including corporate registration cancellation, legal lawsuits, and tax investigations) , innovated and diversified its revenue structure by developing new income streams, such as consulting services based on its misinformation analysis system, moving beyond traditional advertising and sponsorship models. Furthermore, solidarity with international media and human rights organizations played a crucial role as an effective defense mechanism against political suppression. Chequeado in Argentina was an exemplary case of a non-profit fact-checking organization successfully establishing itself institutionally. Chequeado established its identity as a data-driven, neutral verification institution within Argentina's polarized media landscape. Furthermore, Chequeado designed a diversified funding structure to ensure the organization's independence and financial sustainability. Beyond being a mere producer of fact-check content, Chequeado secured international leadership within civil society and the global community. In short, Chequeado's institutionalization can be evaluated as the result of the organic combination of three elements: maintaining clear neutrality, securing diversified funding sources for financial independence, and extensive solidarity activities to strengthen the capabilities of the fact-checking ecosystem as a whole. These cases suggest that for the sustainability of fact-checking journalism, it is essential to diversify and stabilize funding models, strengthen social and international solidarity against undue external attacks, and build broad public trust based on methodological rigor and transparency. While fact-checking journalism serves as a democratic mechanism against misinformation, its practice inherently carries the dilemma of potentially inducing political tension. Therefore, ensuring the sustainability of fact-checking journalism requires not only efforts to guarantee the objectivity of factual verification but also multi-dimensional strategies to strategically respond to real-world political threats.

한국어

팩트체크 저널리즘은 허위 정보가 넘쳐나는 현대 사회에서 공론의 질을 높이고 정치 및 사회 행위자들에게 책임성을 부여하는 역할을 한다. 그러나 이러한 중요성에도 불구하고, 팩트체크 활동 자체가 정치적 논쟁의 대상이 되어 그 지속가능성이 위협받고 있다. 본 논문은 이러한 팩트체크 저널리즘의 지속가능성을 위협하는 정치적, 경제적, 시민사회적 요인을 한국의 SNU팩트체크, 필리핀의 래플러, 아르헨티나의 체케아도 사례를 비교 분석 하여 고찰한다. 이 사례들은 팩트체크 저널리즘의 지속가능성을 위해 재원 모델의 다각화 및 안정화, 부당한 외부 공격에 맞설 수 있는 사회적 연대 강화, 그리고 방법론적 엄격성과 투명성을 기반으로 한 광범위한 대중적 신뢰 확보가 중요함을 시사한다. 팩트체크 저널리즘 은 허위 정보에 대응하는 민주주의적 기제이지만, 그 실천이 본질적으로 정치적 긴장을 유발할 수밖에 없는 딜레마를 안고 있으며 사실 검증의 객관성 확보 노력과 더불어 현실 정치적 위협에 대한 전략적인 다차원적 대응이 필수적이다.