1. Suspicious / unknown website address

This should obviously be the first thing you have to look at when opening any website. If its relatively unknown or you never heard of it, then consider it as an alarm button for your extra vigilance and your (let’s call it) bullshit-o-meter and then start looking for other signs. Also, many suspicious websites have a poor interface and run click-bait ads.

My best advice though is, if you want to build an opinion on the refugee crisis — which is an extremely sensitive subject, read only the well-established sources of information that use extensive fact-checking and multiple-source confirmation, such as New York Times, BBC, Washington Post, The Economist, Wall Street Journal, New Yorker, The Atlantic etc.

Some examples of articles I would recommend reading on the topic are here, here and here.

The Conservative Papers —an example of a suspicious looking website

2. Deceptive headlines

Headlines can, in many times, prove the difference between a reliable article and one that is deceptive. Avoid headlines (articles) that use:

overly emotional adjectives (“OMG”; “terrifying; “you wouldn’t believe it”).

Speculative Call To Actions (CTAs)- such as WATCH; LEAKED PHOTOS.

CAPSLOCK (fully or partially). Caps-lock words became of symbol of hysteria, aggressiveness and shouting in the online realm and that‘s why no prestigious online outlet or magazine would ever dare to use caps-lock in headlines. They’re OK only if you’re reading a tabloid, but I‘ll definitely not recommend gathering information on refugee/migrant crisis from tabloids.

3. Photos with no indicated source, location or date

The above-mentioned picture from Conservative Post on ISIS fighters being smuggled into Europe is a perfect example in this respect: no information on “where, what and when” and no photo credits mentioned.

Now, remember the refugee who was tripped up by a Hungarian journalist, while he was carrying his 7 year-old son?

Osama al-Abd al-Mohsen, the football coach, pictured with his 7-year-old son in Syria. Source: Euronews

The same Conservative Post shamelessly faked his story and wrongly portrayed him as an ISIS supporter. Their “proof”? This picture:

Conservative Post wrongly claims this is Osama al-Abd al-Mohsen

Yeah right. Those sunglasses and that keffiyeh/scarf on his head are quite “revealing”. Again, an image with no background info provided.

Here are some tools that will help you debunk a potential fake story

4. Embedded videos from obscure Youtube accounts

Indeed, the World Wide Web is fascinatingly diverse because of the content personal user upload worldwide, but when dealing with sensitive topics, such as the refugee/migrant crisis in Europe, it is more than recommended to be vigilant when watching videos from unknown users. Take this video from user STReAMBG, embedded in a similar article. It claims that “migrants destroy islands in Greece”, but without giving any detail on when and where was this happening. Also pay attention to the low-quality of the video (another red-flag), which most probably means the video is quite old, or it was downloaded and re-uploaded by someone who wrongly claims to be an original eyewitness.

Another example of suspicious video is this one from LiveLeak:

The video shows “violent migrants in a small German town”. Again, no information on date, location and source whatsoever. Also, be attentive on the user who uploads this type of videos — his upload history can in many instances reveal his interests and ideology. In our particular example, the user P700Granit has uploaded several videos related to the refugee/migrant crisis, and all of them have the same characteristics — low-quality, no specific location or date mentioned. Oh, and apparently he’s a fan of Vladimir Putin, so he kind of strikes me as one of those Russian trolls working at that infamous troll “factory” in Saint Petersburg, Russia — The Agency.

5. The articles “jumps” to the conclusion fast… waaay too fast

The article which I featured at the beginning proves this point. Initially, the post refers to a source from Syrian Operative which claims that more than 4,000 ISIS gunmen had been smuggled into Western nations. Then, using that particular image as evidence, they “jump” to the conclusion, quote:

Well, with this new Leaked picture, everything seems confirmed.

One picture and everything is confirmed? Just how idiotic is that?!

Another article, written in Romanian (I’m from Moldova, I speak Romanian) claims that there are “many weapons buried in Germany, which will be used to start the European Jihad”. The authors backs his theory on a “chat he had with a former member of Soviet Special Forces, who told him this theory of truth”. He then develops the Soviet old man’s theory, who claims, among others, that “EU politicians might have taken bribes from ISIS to hide the truth”. Right….

6. Article claims “secret”/“revealing”/ “leaked” information

That’s a usual tactic to prey the uninformed and undocumented people, by promising something “secret”,“revealing” or “leaked”, or something that the “main stream media refuses to show”. In other words, ordinary conspiracies. Like this example below:

“Leaked”, “Revealed” — usual catch phrase to attract non-suspecting people.

Or as David Baddiel from The Guardian ushered it: