Bangladesh’s fact-checkers are being squeezed from two directions at once: the money is drying up and despite sharing the same core mission, there is a frustrating disconnect with mainstream newsrooms.
This growing professional and financial strain was the center of discussion at the roundtable at the conclusion of the FactFest 2026 held on September 27–28, organised by Digitally Right in partnership with the Fojo Media Institute, under the Media Safety in the Digital Age project and with support from the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency. It brought together around 100 fact-checkers, journalists, researchers, academics and students.
A total of 13 sessions explored political disinformation, religious extremism, gendered disinformation, information warfare, artificial intelligence, digital investigations, public trust and the future of fact-checking.
Speakers at the roundtable pointed out that to remain credible and avoid any biases, fact-checking organisations often cannot advertise or form media partnerships.
However, the number of fact-checking organisations in Bangladesh has increased as opposed to the global decline, shared Shuvashish Das Ray Dip, assistant editor of FactWatch. And to sustain further, he said organisations need to diversify sources of revenue through research, media and information-literacy training and other services to create alternative funding opportunities.
Md Sakiuzzaman, co-founder of Rumor Scanner, also expressed apprehension over funding, noting that some organisations have already started laying off staff. He lamented, saying, “We are having to let go of fact-checkers who have been with us for several years due to a budget cut.”
Miraj Ahmed Chowdhury, managing director of Digitally Right, said organisations need a mix of funding sources, including government and private-sector support, media literacy training, research and other services. Since conventional advertising is often not viable, he said, “We have to look at several sources.”
Another growing concern for the fact-checking community is the uneven relationship between fact-checkers and mainstream media, with some outlets increasingly embracing fact-checking while others remain reluctant to accept scrutiny, speakers said at FactFest 2026.
Azad Baig, digital growth editor of The Daily Star, said some media organisations are adding fact-checkers to their teams and reviewing reports before publication. While parts of mainstream media may view fact-checkers as unwelcome, he said responsible outlets would increasingly seek their advice to avoid errors.
Adnan Aziz, fact-checker at Media Resources Development Initiative (MRDI) called for a more constructive relationship, arguing that fact-checkers should act as “friends of the media.” Media organisations operate on a large scale and can make mistakes, he said, adding that fact-checkers should identify those errors without creating a hostile environment.
Md Sakiuzzaman of Rumor Scanner said collaboration remains limited despite efforts to work with around 25 online media outlets. Some organisations actively cooperate, while others remain unwilling, making collaboration a “multi-layered” challenge.
Saleh Fuad of Dhaka Stream said media organisations are now becoming more conscious of the need to take fact-checking into account. He suggested that while journalists should expect their work to be fact-checked, media organisations should also scrutinise the work of fact-checkers.
The discussion reflected a relationship that remains marked by tension but is gradually shifting towards greater awareness and, in some cases, collaboration.
Beyond debunking
Across the two days, one idea became increasingly clear: responding to misinformation is no longer only about proving whether a particular claim is true or false. It is also about understanding why narratives spread, who is behind them, how they affect people and how verified information can reach audiences.
The need to build a stronger community was one of the themes from the beginning. Miraj Ahmed Chowdhury, managing director of Digitally Right, said FactFest was created to provide a space for Bangladesh’s growing fact-checking community to meet and discuss both existing and emerging challenges.
Swedish Ambassador to Bangladesh Nicolas Linus Ragnas Weeks, highlighted the responsibility of media and civil society to ensure that people can access credible information and that journalists can investigate wrongdoing without fear.
That broader question of how information shapes public life was explored throughout the conference.
During the session “Engineering Reality: Information Warfare and the Fragility of Trust in Democratic Transitions,” Dr Gregory John Simons, professor at Daffodil International University, asked whether information exists primarily to inform people or to influence them.
“If information is free to access, it is about influence. That’s the main point: you want to get your message across to an audience,” Simons said, while also pointing to the role of strategic competition, where actors use information to their advantage against an opponent or target.
Real-world impact and institutional realities
In a panel discussion on changing political dynamics, speakers examined how disinformation actors use tactics ranging from taking old media reports out of context to creating AI-generated crowds, fake leaks, fake accounts, doxxing and targeted harassment.
Minhaj Aman, research and policy lead at Activate Rights, argued that political actors cannot be viewed separately from the wider systems through which information is produced and distributed. He pointed to the continuing importance of state infrastructure and networks established under previous administrations.
That led to a broader discussion about whether the traditional claim-by-claim approach to fact-checking is enough as the consequences of misleading narratives can extend far beyond social media.
A session on investigating religious extremism in Bangladesh’s online space examined how coordinated campaigns can move between online platforms and real-world communities. Investigative reporters and researchers discussed cases involving hashtags, extremist symbols and accusations of blasphemy.
Ahamed Yaseer Abrar, senior research officer at Dismislab, described how accusations of being “Shatim-e-Rasool” have been used to target individuals online. He said researchers found posts and groups compiling people’s photographs, addresses and phone numbers, while victims described living under constant fear after online accusations reached their communities.
At a session on gendered disinformation, speakers discussed how women in political and public life are often targeted differently from men. Noshin Tabassum of Dismislab said gendered disinformation has increasingly become a tool to silence women, with attacks focusing on their appearance, clothing and personal lives rather than their political positions and actions.
Tajnuva Jabeen, an organiser of political platform Alternatives, spoke about the growing use of AI to manipulate images of women. She said that while many women have developed resilience against such attacks, the consequences become particularly serious when families are targeted.
Anwara Parvin of FactWatch connected the issue to women’s participation in politics, arguing that fact-checkers alone cannot solve the problem. Policymakers, she said, also need to respond quickly when such campaigns emerge.
In another session, Swasti Chatterjee, deputy editor and project coordinator at BOOM, contributed a regional perspective on information manipulation and fact-checking. She said fact-checkers are increasingly having to move beyond traditional verification by adopting investigative reporting and on-the-ground verification.
The challenge is not only technological. Qadaruddin Shishir, editor of The Dissent, pointed to the limitations within newsrooms themselves. Many organisations lack the capacity for digital investigations, while investigations can become politically sensitive because they may affect someone’s reputation.
Media also faces challenges over fake photocards. Regarding the isssue, Azad Baig, digital growth editor at The Daily Star said, “Media often makes mistakes when trying to present information quickly. However, they lack the sense to give disclaimers or the courage to admit faults. Media cannot just delete posts, rather they have to take responsibility of the information they put out. They have to edit the post with proper disclaimer and adopt a correction policy.”
Call for meaningful law rather than vague restrictions under CSA
At the closing roundtable of FactFest 2026, fact-checkers, journalists and researchers also raised concerns over the proposed amendments to the Cyber Security Act 2026, particularly provisions that would criminalise defamation, “humiliation” and “bullying,” with penalties including prison terms and fines.
An investigative reporter at The Dissent cautioned that fact-checks themselves could be weaponised to target people if the law fails to distinguish between deliberately spreading harmful disinformation and reporting on it in the public interest.
Participants called for meaningful and clearly defined legal provisions to address harmful disinformation without creating vague restrictions that could affect legitimate journalism and fact-checking.
Making truth travel
The conference also asked how ordinary people can better navigate information. Tasnim Jara said children can learn to tell reliable information from falsehood if given the right tools, and that this should be taught in schools, not just universities. Din M Sumon Rahman, dean of the School of Social Sciences, noted that misinformation travels faster because truth is not always the most shareable content.
That challenge was anchored by the keynote by Paul Rapacioli, director of the Fojo Media Institute. He recalled how a routine Swedish safety decision about Christmas lights was twisted into a story about Sweden downplaying its Christian traditions. People share such stories, he said, because they confirm existing beliefs, explain a problem or reinforce a sense of belonging. “Truth has to be established. Truth has to travel. And truth has to be trusted when it arrives,” he said.
The task for fact-checkers, then, is not only to find the truth. It is to investigate how information is produced, understand the narratives and systems that amplify it, and communicate verified facts in ways audiences can trust.