Use case

Verify breaking news

Direct answer: treat a viral claim as a hypothesis. Capture the exact claim and window, assess the source chain, test only the World Monitor signal families that can support or contradict it, record contradictions and coverage gaps, then assign a qualified outcome before you brief anyone.

Who this is for

Newsroom researchers, OSINT analysts, duty-of-care officers, and desk editors who need a bounded verification record in minutes — not a rewritten article and not a generic homepage tour.

Not for: sole basis for emergency, military, legal, medical, or safety decisions. World Monitor aggregates public and licensed signals; correlated sensors are evidence, not certainty, and this workflow does not certify that an event is true.

Workflow inputs and output

End-to-end workflow

  1. Capture the claim precisely. Write the exact wording, claimed location, time window, and decision deadline. Separate what is asserted from what is merely implied.
  2. Assess the original source. Note publication time, first-hand vs derivative media, and the repost chain. Treat wire pickup as reach, not independent confirmation.
  3. Check news velocity without equating repetition to proof. Look at topic velocity, hotspot movement, and outlet diversity. Many copies of one video are still one source family.
  4. Test only relevant independent signals. Use AIS/maritime, aviation/NOTAMs, FIRMS thermal, seismic, connectivity/outages, webcams, or country context when the claim’s physics or geography would leave a fingerprint. Skip layers that cannot speak to this claim.
  5. Record freshness, fit, and contradictions. Log observation time, spatial/temporal mismatch, missing coverage that can explain a quiet sensor, and any signal that conflicts with the claim.
  6. Assign a qualified outcome. Choose supported, contradicted, unresolved, or stale — with uncertainty visible — then continue into the exact dashboard, Pro alert, API, or MCP action below.

Product proof used by this workflow

Worked example: Gulf port explosion claim

A social post claims a major explosion at a Gulf port with operations halted. Capture the exact port name, claimed minute, and the video’s alleged capture time.

Supporting path: AIS cells near the berth show ships holding offshore, FIRMS records a thermal anomaly inside the claimed window, and a nearby webcam shows an abnormal skyline. The note records “supported pending primary reporting” with observation timestamps.

Uncertainty path: the same claim with only social reposts, no AIS anomaly in a thinly covered AIS region, no thermal hit on the next satellite pass, and a silent seismic network near a dense station field becomes “unresolved / possibly recycled.” Absence of AIS here is weak evidence of calm, not proof the event did not occur.

Provenance, freshness, and limits

Exact next action

Open the MENA verification map with AIS, flights, fires, outages, hotspots, natural, and military layers for a 24-hour window, then retarget the view to the claimed coordinates.

Open verification map layers →

Secondary handoffs when they continue this workflow:

Supporting material

Canonical treatment (#6850): this page owns the evergreen verification procedure. The OSINT blog article remains dated supporting editorial with minute-by-minute narrative — not a duplicate indexable task page. No redirect.