Course 1 - Module 4 - Lesson 1
Fact-checks, private data, and bias checks for normal people
Trust, But Bring a Checklist
Separate claims from confident language
Fact-checking starts by identifying claims that could be true or false. Highlight names, dates, numbers, quotations, and statements about how something works. Open original sources when the claim matters. A citation is useful only when the linked page actually supports the statement.
For example, an AI-written description of a museum might give a plausible ticket price. Check the museum's own page and the date of your visit. If no reliable price is available, leave it unconfirmed instead of copying the number into a group invitation.
Share less private information
Before uploading a file, ask whether the task needs every detail it contains. Replace names with roles and remove account numbers, passwords, contact details, or sensitive personal stories where possible. A small anonymous example often teaches the assistant enough about the structure.
Removing a name alone may not anonymize a record. A rare job title, location, and incident date could still identify someone. Follow your organization's approved handling process and use invented examples when learning a new service.
Look for uneven assumptions
Bias can appear in which people are included, how they are described, and which possibilities are ignored. Review an event plan for assumptions about mobility, language, internet access, and family schedules. Ask whose needs the suggested default might overlook.
Try changing an irrelevant detail in a fictional example and comparing the response. Unexpected differences are a reason to investigate, not proof that the system is fair or unfair in every case. Combine these checks with feedback from the people affected.
Tiny experiment
Review an invented museum invitation containing a ticket price, a full phone number, and a stairs-only meeting point. Identify one fact, privacy, and inclusion check.
Confidence check
Which detail would you remove before sharing, and whose perspective would improve your review?