A Voter’s Guide to Misinformation

How to recognize misleading claims - and respond with facts instead of outrage

By Buddy Jericho

Campaign Manager, Victor Marx for Governor

The most effective misinformation does not always look false.

It often includes real facts, quotes and numbers. What makes it misleading is what has been exaggerated, taken out of context or left out. Add an emotional headline and a conclusion we already want to believe, and even smart people can share something before examining it.

Before entering politics, I spent years working in intelligence. I later founded Echo Analytics Group, an open-source intelligence research and training company. We trained thousands of military, intelligence and law-enforcement professionals, and I helped build courses on critical thinking, social-media analysis and online research.

The tools used by professional analysts can be complicated. The most important lessons are not. Every voter - and every American - can use them.

As we enter the general election, our supporters should expect a flood of claims about our candidate. Some will be fair. Some will be biased. Some will leave out important facts. Some will be false.

This guide is for you.

Our campaign cannot answer every misleading article, post, video or accusation. But our supporters collectively reach far more people than our staff ever could. That gives you an opportunity to help others find the truth - and a responsibility to respond calmly and accurately.

The goal is not to attack reporters or win every argument. It is to help people see the facts and make up their own minds.

But this is also bigger than our campaign.

Free people must be able to think for themselves. We should not drift toward an Orwellian society where institutions, political parties or computer algorithms shape reality for us. Americans should never surrender their judgment simply because a claim appears on a screen.

Misinformation, disinformation and persuasion

Misinformation is false or misleading information shared by someone who may believe it is true.

Disinformation is false or misleading information deliberately spread to deceive.

The difference is intent, which is often difficult to prove.

Biased or persuasive reporting is different. It may use true facts but emphasize certain details or words to push readers toward a particular conclusion.

Instead of immediately accusing someone of lying, ask:

Is the claim accurate, supported by evidence and presented in context?

Watch for dramatic headlines, percentages without the actual numbers, quotes cut from a longer conversation, unnamed experts and accusations presented as proven facts.

Words such as “extreme,” “radical” or “dangerous” may tell you how the writer wants you to feel. They do not prove the claim.

When two headlines can both be true

Consider recent reporting about crime in Denver.

One headline said crime was continuing to fall, except for homicides. Another emphasized that homicides had surged nearly 37 percent.

Both used the same police data.

Denver recorded 26 homicides during the first half of 2026, a 37 percent increase from the same period in 2025. But violent crime overall was down 9 percent, robberies were down 12 percent and auto theft was down 27 percent.

Both headlines contained truth. Neither gave the complete picture.

A reader focused only on the homicide increase might believe all crime was rising. A reader focused only on the broader decline might overlook a serious increase in killings.

The problem was not a fake number. It was selection, timeframe and emphasis.

To examine information quickly, remember one word:

STOP

S - Slow down

When a headline makes you angry, afraid or instantly satisfied because it confirms what you already believe, pause.

Ask:

Is this informing me, or trying to provoke me?

T - Trace the claim

Find the original source: the complete video, transcript, court ruling, government report, study or dataset.

Someone’s description of the evidence is not the evidence.

Ask:

What original source supports this claim?

O - Open other sources

Leave the original page. Look for independent coverage, public records and sources with different viewpoints. Make sure several stories are not simply repeating the same report.

Five stories repeating one source are not five confirmations.

Ask:

What do other credible sources say, and what evidence are they using?

P - Pinpoint the problem

Do not simply call something “fake news.”

Is the claim false, unsupported, exaggerated or missing context? Does the headline go further than the evidence? Is an accusation being treated as fact?

Specific evidence is stronger than outrage.

Use ChatGPT or Claude to help

Tools such as ChatGPT or Claude can help separate facts from opinion, spot emotional language, find missing context and locate sources worth checking.

But they can also make mistakes and give answers that sound confident but are wrong. Treat them as research assistants, not final authorities. Guidance from the National Institute of Standards and Technology also emphasizes human review and oversight when using generative artificial intelligence.

Paste the article into the tool and use this prompt:

Analyze this article using the STOP method. Identify the main factual claims, original evidence, emotional or persuasive language and important missing context. Compare the claims with credible primary and independent sources. Tell me what appears accurate, what may be misleading and what remains unproven. Do not guess the author’s intent. Give me the sources you used.

Then open those sources and check them yourself.

Before you respond online

Verify the claim first.

Lead with evidence, not insults. Correct the exact claim, not the person sharing it. Do not repeat a false accusation more than necessary. And know when to stop.

One calm, sourced response can persuade more people than 30 angry comments.

A useful response can be simple:

This headline leaves out important context. The original record shows ____. Here is the source so people can review the complete information themselves.

These standards must apply to journalists, political opponents, social-media personalities, our supporters - and our own campaign.

If we expect others to tell the truth, we must be willing to hold ourselves to the same standard.

Our goal is not to create louder supporters or louder Americans. It is to create better-informed citizens who are harder to mislead and harder to manipulate.

That is important to this election. It is essential to remaining a free people.

Before you believe something, reject it or share it, remember:

STOP.

Sources and Further Reading

UNESCO: Definitions of misinformation and disinformation, including the role of intent.

City and County of Denver: Public crime data and reporting dashboards used to review Denver crime trends.

Axios Denver: July 2026 reporting on the increase in homicides alongside declines in most other major crime categories.

Digital Inquiry Group: Guidance on “lateral reading”—leaving the original page to investigate the source, evidence and independent coverage.

National Institute of Standards and Technology: Guidance for managing the risks of generative AI tools and maintaining human review of their outputs.