Join free

All stories

El Cerrito · Election · Council · Roads · Thu Oct 1

Grade C, score 57 of 100 · open the full fact check No independent confirmation yet

“At El Cerrito candidates’ forum, six vying for City Council talk about the budget, renovations and safe streets”

Headline as Richmond Confidential wrote it

At El Cerrito candidates’ forum, six vying for City Council talk about the budget, renovations and safe streets

What the reporting says

Richmond Confidential reports: “The six candidates vying for two open seats on the El Cerrito City Council faced off Wednesday at Veterans Memorial Association hall, where much of the discussion focused on the city budget.”

Read it at Richmond Confidential

The full fact check1 outlet · Grade C
> THE MARTINEZ WIRE ▌SOURCE CHECK · OCT 2, 2026C57 / 100

Grade C · score 57/100

The story links one public document and names ten people or agencies on the record.

Checked Fri Oct 2, 8:52 AM · 1 of 1 page read

Sources checked

No independent confirmation found yet.

The reporting

  1. “At El Cerrito candidates’ forum, six vying for City Council talk about the budget, renovations and safe streets”Richmond Confidential

coverage1 outlet

1 newsroom

Richmond Confidential

News report · Jaime Geary · Thu Oct 1, 10:21 PM

Source grade C57/100

“At El Cerrito candidates’ forum, six vying for City Council talk about the budget, renovations and safe streets”

The six candidates vying for two open seats on the El Cerrito City Council faced off Wednesday at Veterans Memorial Association hall, where much of the discussion focused on the city budget.

The opening, as Richmond Confidential wrote it

1 document linked9 quotes9 of 19 paragraphs say where facts came fromelcerrito.gov

Read the full story at Richmond Confidential

How this was graded26.8 + 0 + 10 + 9 = 45.8 of 80 → 57/100 · Grade C
26.8
Sourcing · of 45
0
Corroboration · of 15
10
Headline · of 10
9
Transparency · of 10

Left out: Record match (nothing of that kind to count).

Comments

Comments go up at once and are checked automatically: no links but public records, no phone numbers, emails or street addresses, nothing hateful or threatening. Three reports from readers take a comment down. Leave the name empty to post as Reader and a short code.

    No comments yet.

    How the grading works

    The short version

    The Wire grades each article from what the page itself shows: whether its facts say where they came from, the public documents it links, the other outlets and sources that confirm the same story, whether its facts match the Wire's own public records, a calm headline, and a clear byline and date. The story takes its best-sourced telling's grade. The grade describes the page, never the people in it.

    The formulaGrade = 100 × points ÷ possibleA 85 · B 70 · C 55 · D 40

    Grade = 100 × points ÷ possibleeach article · 0 to 100

    Story = its best tellingA 85 · B 70 · C 55 · D 40 · F below 40

    45
    Sourcing · 25 for the share of facts that say where they came from, 0, 7 or 12 for none, one or two or more public documents linked, 0 to 8 for the people and agencies named on the record
    15
    Corroboration · 8 or 12 for one or two or more other outlets or sources confirming it, 3 more when one is official; 8 for a telling alone that links two or more documents
    20
    Record match · 20 × the key facts confirmed or matching the Wire's records ÷ the facts checked; left out when none could be checked
    10
    Headline · less for a question, capitals, an exclamation mark, a teaser or heated words
    10
    Transparency · a byline, a date, an update or correction note, the outlet's identity, the kind labelled
    This story's arithmeticone article graded
    OutletSCRHTScore
    Richmond Confidential26.80–10957

    26.8 + 0 + 10 + 9 = 45.8 of 80 → 57/100 · Grade C

    S sourcing · C corroboration · R record match · H headline · T transparency. A dash is a part left out.

    How it is checked6 rules
    • Every input is read by rules from the page itself; the arithmetic is shown for every article.
    • An article that names no source, links no document and names no one on the record says "No sources cited", and its grade is at most D.
    • Where the Wire's own records hold the fact (a vote, a meeting, an amount, a call, a listing), the story and the record are set side by side; a vote the record tells differently holds the grade at most at D.
    • An agency's own release is the record itself and is not graded; an outlet that prints it as its story counts once.
    • Each story's key facts are checked for independent confirmation: first by rules against the Wire's records and the agencies' own releases, then each morning by research. A confirmation counts only when the Wire read the source's page itself and found the sentence on it; a government page, a public record or another newsroom's own reporting, never a copy of the story or a social post. A source that tells a fact differently is shown beside the story.
    • A page the Wire cannot read is never guessed at: it shows only its own headline, quoted, and is not graded.
    Sources1 records
    1. News reportThu Oct 1Richmond ConfidentialRead