Show Your Work: How Agencies Can Explain Verification Steps When Responding to Misinformation

When false information starts spreading about your agency, the instinct is often to deny it quickly and move on. But in today’s environment, what you say matters less than how you prove it. A clear explanation of your verification process — how you checked, who confirmed, and what evidence supports your statement — can do far more to restore confidence than a simple rebuttal ever will.

Why explaining the process matters

People don’t just want information; they want to know it’s been handled responsibly. When you outline the steps taken to confirm details, you invite the public into your process — even briefly — and that builds trust.

A post or statement that says “We verified this information with multiple departments and partner agencies before publishing” carries far more weight than “That’s not true.” The public doesn’t see your inbox or internal messages. They see transparency as proof of integrity.

Start with calm, factual framing

When addressing misinformation, tone is everything. Start by describing the situation in neutral language and avoid repeating false claims in full — repetition amplifies them.

Instead, focus on what is true:

That phrasing acknowledges public concern, sets out your verification process, and keeps you in control of the narrative.

Outline your verification steps

The goal is not to overwhelm your audience with process but to show diligence. These are examples of steps worth summarising publicly:

1. Awareness – when you first learned of the claim.

2. Assessment – which teams or departments reviewed it.

3. Source checking – what records or data you verified.

4. External validation – any confirmation from partner agencies or independent sources.

5. Response – what you’re now communicating and why.

You don’t need to publish your full investigation, but a short description of your approach shows you take misinformation seriously.

Use plain language to show accountability

Avoid technical jargon. Instead, use everyday phrasing that reinforces transparency:

• “We cross-checked this claim against official records.”

• “Our team confirmed with local partners that this report is false.”

• “The images circulating online do not match the event location; we’ve verified this through on-site staff.”

These statements are clear, measurable, and authoritative — and they invite trust because they focus on facts, not feelings.

Balance transparency with confidentiality

Not every detail can be shared publicly, especially during investigations or personnel matters. In those cases, transparency means explaining why you can’t disclose everything, not staying silent.

For example:

Acknowledging limits without hiding behind them shows maturity and respect for due process.

Show continuity, not one-off correction

Verifying information shouldn’t only happen during crises. Make it a habit of your communication culture. When people see your agency consistently explain how it checks facts — not just what it says — they come to expect accuracy as standard.

Include verification language in updates, infographics, and after-action reports. Over time, this turns transparency into part of your brand.

The credibility advantage

When trust is lacking, agencies that document and display their verification process have the advantage. They don’t just tell the truth; they show how they got there.

You can’t control what’s said online — but you can control how clearly you prove your own credibility. Transparency isn’t a risk; it’s the strongest reassurance you can offer.