Fact check (ClaimReview) structured data

Коротко

How to add structured data Structured data is a standardized format for providing information about a page and classifying the page content.
Example Imagine a page that evaluates the claim that the earth is flat.
Eligibility guidelines Google doesn’t guarantee that fact checks will be shown in search results, even if your page is marked up correctly according to the Rich Result Test.
Structured data type definitions The following structured data types are required to implement fact checks: ClaimReview Claim Rating You must include the required properties for your content to be eligible fo…
Monitor rich results with Search Console Search Console is a tool that helps you monitor how your pages perform in Google Search.
Troubleshooting If you’re having trouble implementing or debugging structured data, here are some resources that may help you.

We’re phasing out support for ClaimReview markup in Google Search. However, this
markup remains supported by the Factcheck Explorer Tool.

If you have a web page that reviews a claim made by others, you can include
ClaimReview structured data on your web page. ClaimReview structured
data can enable a summarized version of your fact check to display in Google Search results
when your page appears in search results for that claim.

This guide describes the details on how to implement ClaimReview structured data.
If you don’t want to add structured data manually, you can check out the
Fact Check
Markup Tool. To learn more, visit
About the Fact Check
Markup Tool.

How to add structured data

Structured data is a standardized format for providing information about a page and classifying the page
content. If you’re new to structured data, you can learn more about
how structured data works.

Here’s an overview of how to build, test, and release structured data.

Add the required properties. Based on the
format you’re using, learn where to insert structured data on the page.
Using a CMS? It may be easier to use a plugin that’s integrated into your CMS.

Using JavaScript? Learn how to
generate structured data with JavaScript.
Follow the guidelines.
Validate your code using the
Rich Results Test
and fix any critical errors. Consider also fixing any non-critical issues that may be flagged
in the tool, as they can help improve the quality of your structured data (however, this isn’t necessary to be eligible for rich results).
Deploy a few pages that include your structured data and use the URL Inspection tool to test how Google sees the page. Be sure that your page is
accessible to Google and not blocked by a robots.txt file, the noindex tag, or
login requirements. If the page looks okay, you can
ask Google to recrawl your URLs.
Note: Allow time for re-crawling and re-indexing. Remember that it
may take several days after publishing a page for Google to find and crawl it.
To keep Google informed of future changes, we recommend that you
submit a sitemap. You can automate this with the
Search Console Sitemap API.

Example

Imagine a page that evaluates the claim that the earth is flat. Here is what a
search for “the world is flat” might look like in Google Search results if the page
provides a ClaimReview element (note that the actual visual design may change):

Single claim review associated with a page

Here’s an example of structured data on the page that hosts this fact check:

<html> 
 <head> 
 <title>The world is flat</title> 
 <script type=”application/ld+json”> 
 { 
 “@context”: “https://schema.org”, 
 “@type”: “ClaimReview”, 
 “url”: “https://example.com/news/science/worldisflat.html”, 
 “claimReviewed”: “The world is flat”, 
 “itemReviewed”: { 
 “@type”: “Claim”, 
 “author”: { 
 “@type”: “Organization”, 
 “name”: “Square World Society”, 
 “sameAs”: “https://example.flatworlders.com/we-know-that-the-world-is-flat” 
 }, 
 “datePublished”: “2024-06-20”, 
 “appearance”: { 
 “@type”: “OpinionNewsArticle”, 
 “url”: “https://example.com/news/a122121”, 
 “headline”: “Square Earth – Flat earthers for the Internet age”, 
 “datePublished”: “2024-06-22”, 
 “author”: { 
 “@type”: “Person”, 
 “name”: “T. Tellar” 
 }, 
 “image”: “https://example.com/photos/1×1/photo.jpg”, 
 “publisher”: { 
 “@type”: “Organization”, 
 “name”: “Skeptical News”, 
 “logo”: { 
 “@type”: “ImageObject”, 
 “url”: “https://example.com/logo.jpg” 
 } 
 } 
 } 
 }, 
 “author”: { 
 “@type”: “Organization”, 
 “name”: “Example.com science watch” 
 }, 
 “reviewRating”: { 
 “@type”: “Rating”, 
 “ratingValue”: 1, 
 “bestRating”: 5, 
 “worstRating”: 1, 
 “alternateName”: “False” 
 } 
 } 
 </script> 
 </head> 
 <body> 
 </body> 
</html>

Eligibility guidelines

Google doesn’t guarantee that fact checks will be shown in search results, even if your page is
marked up correctly according to the Rich Result Test. Using structured data enables a feature to be present,
it does not guarantee that it will be present. The Google algorithm programmatically
determines the eligibility for fact check rich results, depending on many variables, including
the following guidelines.

For your fact check content to be eligible to display as a fact check rich result on Google
Search, you must meet the following guidelines:

Your site must have several pages marked with ClaimReview
structured data.
You must follow all the structured data
guidelines and Search Essentials.
There must not be any mismatch between the structured data and page content (for example, if the
structured data indicated that the claim is true, but the content on the page said the
claim was false). Instead, make sure that both the content and structured data match (for
example, both indicate that the claim is true).
You must meet the standards for accountability, transparency, readability, and site
misrepresentation, as articulated in our
Google
News General Guidelines.
You must have a corrections policy or have a mechanism for users to report errors.
Websites for political entities (such as campaigns, parties, or elected officials) aren’t
eligible for this feature.
Your readers can easily identify the claims and checks in the body of the article. Your
readers are able to understand what was checked and what conclusions were reached.
You must clearly attribute the specific claim that you’re assessing to a distinct
origin (separate from your website), whether it’s another website, public statement, social media, or other
traceable source.
Your fact check analysis must be traceable and transparent about sources and methods, with
citations and references to primary sources.

Technical guidelines

To be eligible for the single fact check rich result, a page must only have one
ClaimReview element. If you add multiple ClaimReview
elements per page, the page won’t be eligible for the single fact check rich result.
The page hosting the ClaimReview element must have at least a brief summary
of the fact check and the evaluation, if not the full text.
A specific ClaimReview must only be on one page on your site. Do
not repeat the same fact check on multiple pages, unless they are variations of the same
page (for example, you can post the same ClaimReview on the mobile and desktop
versions of a page).
If your website aggregates fact-check articles, ensure that all articles match the
criteria and that you provide an open and publicly available list of all fact-check websites
you aggregate.

Structured data type definitions

The following structured data types are required to implement fact checks:

ClaimReview
Claim
Rating

You must include the required properties for your content to be eligible for display as a rich result.
You can also include the recommended properties to add more information about your content,
which could provide a better user experience.

`ClaimReview`

The full definition of ClaimReview is available at
schema.org/ClaimReview.
The Google-supported properties are the following:

Required properties

Required properties
`claimReviewed`	`Text` A short summary of the claim being evaluated. Try to keep this less than 75 characters to minimize wrapping when displayed on a mobile device. Don’t include the rating in the `claimReviewed` field. Instead, specify the rating in the `reviewRating` field.
`reviewRating`	`Rating` The assessment of the claim. This object supports both a numeric and a textual assessment. The textual value is currently the only value shown in search results. Different fact-checking projects have a variety of rating schemes which can have subtle differences, particularly for intermediate values. It is important to document such rating schemes to clarify the meaning of the numeric ratings. Minimally, there must be a number to text rating system for all your fact checks that carry numeric scores. 1 = “False” 2 = “Mostly false” 3 = “Half true” 4 = “Mostly true” 5 = “True” For more information, see Rating.
`url`	`URL` Link to the page hosting the full article of the fact check. The domain of this URL value must be the same domain as, or a subdomain of, the page hosting this `ClaimReview` element. Redirects or shortened URLs (such as g.co/searchconsole) are not resolved, and so will not work here.

claimReviewed

Text

A short summary of the claim being evaluated. Try to keep this less than 75 characters
to minimize wrapping when displayed on a mobile device.

Don’t include the rating in the claimReviewed field.
Instead, specify the rating in the reviewRating field.

reviewRating

Rating

The assessment of the claim. This object supports both a numeric and a textual assessment.
The textual value is currently the only value shown in search results.

Different fact-checking projects have a variety of rating schemes which can have subtle differences,
particularly for intermediate values. It is important to document such rating schemes to clarify
the meaning of the numeric ratings. Minimally, there must be a number to text rating system
for all your fact checks that carry numeric scores.

1 = “False”
2 = “Mostly false”
3 = “Half true”
4 = “Mostly true”
5 = “True”

For more information, see Rating.

url

URL

Link to the page hosting the full article of the fact check.

The domain of this URL value must be the same domain as, or a subdomain of, the
page hosting this ClaimReview element. Redirects or shortened URLs (such
as g.co/searchconsole) are not resolved, and so will not work here.

Recommended properties

author

Organization или Person

The publisher of the fact check article, not the publisher of the
claim. The author must be an organization or a person. The
author have at least one of the following properties:

name

Text

Name of the organization that is publishing the fact check.

url

URL

The URL of the publisher of the fact check. This can be a home page, contact page,
or other appropriate page.

To help Google best
understand authors across various features, consider following the
author markup best practices.

itemReviewed

Claim

An object describing the claim being made. For more information, see
Claim.

Backwards compatibility: Upon the initial launch
of fact check, Google Search recommended CreativeWork as the
itemReviewed. Google Search continues to support earlier markup patterns.
Here’s an example that shows the original markup style:

<html> 
 <head> 
 <title>The world is flat</title> 
 <script type=”application/ld+json”> 
 { 
 “@context”: “https://schema.org”, 
 “@type”: “ClaimReview”, 
 “datePublished”: “2024-06-22”, 
 “url”: “https://example.com/news/science/worldisflat.html”, 
 “itemReviewed”: 
 { 
 “@type”: “CreativeWork”, 
 “author”: 
 { 
 “@type”: “Organization”, 
 “name”: “Square World Society”, 
 “sameAs”: “https://example.flatworlders.com/we-know-that-the-world-is-flat” 
 }, 
 “datePublished”: “2024-06-20” 
 }, 
 “claimReviewed”: “The world is flat”, 
 “author”: 
 { 
 “@type”: “Organization”, 
 “name”: “Example.com science watch” 
 }, 
 “reviewRating”: 
 { 
 “@type”: “Rating”, 
 “ratingValue”: 1, 
 “bestRating”: 5, 
 “worstRating”: 1, 
 “alternateName” : “False” 
 } 
 } 
 </script> 
 </head> 
 <body> 
 </body> 
</html>

`Claim`

The full definition of Claim is available at
schema.org/Claim.

Recommended properties

appearance

URL или
CreativeWork

A link to, or inline description of, a CreativeWork in which this claim
appears.

We recommend that you add either appearance или firstAppearance.
You don’t need to add both.

author

Organization или
Person

The author of the claim, not the author of the fact check. Don’t include
the author property if the claim doesn’t have an author. If you add
author, define the following properties:

name

Text, required

The publisher of the claim. The publisher can be a person or organization.

sameAs

URL, recommended

Indicates the party that is making the claim, regardless of whether the party
is a Person или
Organization. When multiple publishers
report on the same claim, the appearance property can be repeated. When
multiple parties are making essentially the same claim, the author
property can be repeated.

The URL can be:

The home page of the organization that is making the claim.
Another definitive URL that provides information about the party that is making
the claim, such as a person or organization’s Wikipedia or Wikidata entry.

datePublished

DateTime
или Date

The date when the claim was made or entered public discourse (for example, when it became
popular in social networks).

firstAppearance

URL или
CreativeWork

A link to, or inline description of, a CreativeWork in which this specific
claim first appears.

We recommend that you add either appearance или firstAppearance.
You don’t need to add both.

`Rating`

The full definition of Rating is available at schema.org/Rating.

Required properties

Required properties
`alternateName`	`Text` The truthfulness rating assigned to `ClaimReview.reviewRating`, as a human-readible short word or phrase. This value is displayed in the fact check in search results. Examples: “True” or “Mostly true”. If using a longer sentence, be sure that the beginning of the sentence expresses the meaning, in case the sentence is truncated to fit the display. For example: “Mostly true in the specifics, although the overall claim is somewhat misleading”

alternateName

Text

The truthfulness rating assigned to ClaimReview.reviewRating, as a human-readible
short word or phrase. This value is displayed
in the fact check in search results. Examples: “True” or
“Mostly true”.

If using a longer sentence, be sure that the beginning of the sentence
expresses the meaning, in case the sentence is truncated to fit the display. For example:
“Mostly true in the specifics, although the overall claim is somewhat misleading”

Recommended properties
`bestRating`	`Number` For numeric ratings, the best value possible in the scale from worst to best. Must be greater than `worstRating`. Must be able to be evaluated as a number. Example: 4
`name`	`Text` Same as `alternateName`, and used when `alternateName` is not provided, but we recommend that you specify `alternateName` instead of `name`.
`ratingValue`	`Number` A numeric rating of this claim, in the range `worstRating` — `bestRating` inclusive. Integer values are recommended but not required. The closer the numeric rating is to `bestRating`, the more true it is; the closer this value is to `worstRating`, the more false it is. The numeric rating must be able to be evaluated as a number. Example: 4
`worstRating`	`Number` For numeric ratings, the worst value possible in a scale from worst to best. Must be less than `bestRating`. Must be able to be evaluated as a number. Must have a minimum value of 1. Example: 1

Monitor rich results with Search Console

Search Console is a tool that helps you monitor how your pages perform in Google Search.
You don’t have to sign up for Search Console to be included in Google Search results,
but it can help you understand and improve how Google sees your site. We
recommend checking Search Console in the following cases:

After deploying structured data for the first time
After releasing new templates or updating your code
Analyzing traffic periodically

After deploying structured data for the first time

After Google has indexed your pages, look for issues using the relevant
Rich result status report.
Ideally, there will be an increase of valid items, and no increase in invalid items. If you find issues
in your structured data:

Fix the invalid items.
Inspect a live URL to check if the issue persists.
Request validation using the status report.

After releasing new templates or updating your code

When you make significant changes to your website, monitor for increases in structured data invalid items.

If you see an increase in invalid items, perhaps you rolled out a new template that doesn’t work, or your site interacts with the existing
template in a new and bad way.
If you see a decrease in valid items (not matched by an increase in invalid items), perhaps you are
no longer embedding structured data in your pages. Use the
URL Inspection tool to learn what is causing the issue.

Analyzing traffic periodically

Analyze your Google Search traffic using the Performance Report.
The data will show you how often your page appears as a rich result in Search, how often users click on it and what is
the average position you appear on search results. You can also automatically pull these
results with the Search Console API.

Troubleshooting

If you’re having trouble implementing or debugging structured data, here are some resources that
may help you.

If you’re using a content management system (CMS) or someone else is taking care of your site,
ask them to help you. Make sure to forward any Search Console message that details the issue to them.
Google does not guarantee that features that consume structured data will show up in search results.
For a list of common reasons why Google may not show your content in a rich result, see the
General Structured Data Guidelines.
You might have an error in your structured data. Check the
list of structured data errors
and the Unparsable structured data report.
If you received a structured data manual action against your page, the structured data on
the page will be ignored (although the page can still appear in Google Search results). To fix
structured data issues, use the Manual Actions report.
Review the guidelines again to identify if your content isn’t compliant
with the guidelines. The problem can be caused by either spammy content or spammy markup usage.
However, the issue may not be a syntax issue, and so the Rich Results Test won’t be able to
identify these issues.
Troubleshoot missing rich results / drop in total rich results.
Allow time for re-crawling and re-indexing. Remember that it may take several days after
publishing a page for Google to find and crawl it. For general questions about crawling and indexing, check the
Google Search crawling and indexing FAQ.
Post a question in the Google Search Central forum.

Alien Road

Как мы это применяем

Fact check markup requires a genuine editorial process behind it. We implement it only for clients who actually run one, since the credibility cost of misusing it exceeds any visibility gain.

Связанные услуги

Компания

Вклад

Поиск и видимость

Реклама и эффективность

Дизайн и разработка

Контент и коммуникации

По отраслям

Пакеты услуг

Последние статьи

Büyükçekmece Office

Ataköy Office

Tivat Office

`Rating`

Monitor rich results with Search Console

After deploying structured data for the first time

After releasing new templates or updating your code

Analyzing traffic periodically

Troubleshooting

Как мы это применяем

Нужен быстрый ответ?