How We Measure Podcast Credibility
Trust My Pod uses a transparent, structured method to assess the factual credibility of podcast episodes. Our goal is not to rate political alignment or editorial style, but to evaluate how accurately information is presented—and how responsibly speakers engage with facts, sources, and evidence.
Each podcast episode is reviewed line by line using a multi-step process designed to detect, classify, and weigh all factual claims. The result is a Credibility Score from 0 to 100, supported by public documentation of every step.
What counts as a factual claim?
A factual claim is any statement—direct or implied—that presents information as true about events, people, science, law, history, culture, or public policy. This includes:
- Statistics, dates, policies, or quotes
- Generalizations that imply testable facts (e.g., “Nobody trusts the media anymore”)
- Cause-effect claims or framed assertions (e.g., “Democrats are ignoring crime”)
- Anecdotes used as proof, and sarcastic or emotional remarks treated seriously
Claims that are clearly subjective, metaphorical, or introspective (“I hate this,” “I feel nervous”) are excluded—unless they imply a verifiable claim.
How claims are classified
Once detected, each claim is classified into one of four categories:
- Verified factual – Accurate, well-sourced, and publicly verifiable
- Unverifiable – Cannot be proven or disproven with public evidence
- Misleading – Partially true but exaggerated, decontextualized, or framed to distort
- False – Contradicted by two or more reputable sources
Scoring structure
The final Credibility Score reflects both the ratio of accurate to problematic claims and the rhetorical tone of the episode. It is calculated using the following weighting system:
- False claims reduce the score by 2 points each
- Misleading claims reduce the score by 1 point
- Unverifiable claims reduce the score by 0.5 point
- Verified factual claims stabilize or offset the impact of problematic ones
Tone, sourcing, and delivery also influence the score. Episodes that cite credible sources, frame information clearly, and avoid rhetorical manipulation tend to score higher—even when some claims are problematic.
What the numbers mean
Each episode receives a score from 0 to 100, accompanied by a credibility band to help readers understand the result in context
Score | Band | Public Label |
---|---|---|
80–100 | High Credibility | Highly Reliable |
60–79 | Moderate Credibility | Generally Reliable |
40–59 | Mixed Credibility | Reliability Concerns |
20–39 | Low Credibility | Limited Reliability |
0–19 | Very Low Credibility | Minimal Verifiable Content |
This dual system allows us to highlight differences between episodes without flattening them into a binary "true or false" judgment. A 28/100 and a 42/100 are not the same—and we explain why.
Transparency at every level
Every score is backed by structured documentation, including:
- Total claim counts by category
- Detailed breakdown of the 10 most consequential False, Misleading, and Unverifiable claims
- A three-paragraph explanation of score rationale, tone, and credibility
Want to see the full breakdown of claims for a given episode—or submit a podcast for fact-checking? Contact us at info@trustmypod.org.