Fact checking has gained prominence as a form of journalism for countering mis- and disinformation, however, little scholarly attention has been paid to the Campaign Promise Evaluation Tools (CPETs) operated by some fact checking outfits. Similarly, there has been little consideration given to the differences and similarities between CPETs operated by political science researchers and journalists. Taking Australia’s RMIT ABC Fact Check’s Promise Tracker as a case study, this article uses interviews to investigate approaches by fact checkers and political scientists involved in producing this tool. The resultant analysis finds two distinct but complementary approaches to election promise tracking: one that captures every possible political promise for tracking, fuelled by political science expertise and methodological approaches; and the other led by fact checkers and shaped by the logics of journalism. The case of a prominent Australian example where political science, digital journalism and fact-checking intersect, provides important and original insights into CPETs.
Waller et al. (Mon,) studied this question.