<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="../part2stratml.xsl"?><StrategicPlan><Name>Claim Review and TV/Media -- Discussion Notes</Name><Description>Status of this document:  This is a public document recording notes made during/after Dan Brickley visits to (and calls with) the Archive.org team working on TV-related fact checking, September 2017. It is shared as input into Schema.org and related discussions around improvements to ClaimReview.</Description><OtherInformation>Followup discussion in https://github.com/schemaorg/schemaorg/issues/1686 please.</OtherInformation><StrategicPlanCore><Organization><Name>Dan Brickley</Name><Acronym>DB</Acronym><Identifier>_4627dfdc-6095-11e8-a329-b937fe613715</Identifier><Description>Contact:  &lt;danbri@google.com&gt;</Description><Stakeholder StakeholderTypeType="Organization"><Name>Archive.org</Name><Description/></Stakeholder><Stakeholder StakeholderTypeType="Organization"><Name>Schema.org</Name><Description/></Stakeholder></Organization><Vision><Description/><Identifier>_4627e126-6095-11e8-a329-b937fe613715</Identifier></Vision><Mission><Description/><Identifier>_4627e1da-6095-11e8-a329-b937fe613715</Identifier></Mission><Value><Name/><Description/></Value><Goal><Name>ClaimReview Schema</Name><Description>Adjust the ClaimReview schema documentation on Schema.org to provide examples of a wider variety of sources</Description><Identifier>_4627e27a-6095-11e8-a329-b937fe613715</Identifier><SequenceIndicator>A</SequenceIndicator><Stakeholder StakeholderTypeType="Organization"><Name>Schema.org</Name><Description/></Stakeholder><OtherInformation>The ClaimReview schema already supports a wide variety of use cases which non-experts may not know how to implement given the current documentation.  We would like to adjust the documentation on Schema.org to provide examples of a wider variety of sources, especially VideoObjects and Clips.</OtherInformation><Objective><Name/><Description/><Identifier>_4627e34c-6095-11e8-a329-b937fe613715</Identifier><SequenceIndicator/><Stakeholder><Name/><Description/></Stakeholder><OtherInformation/></Objective></Goal><Goal><Name>Video Clips</Name><Description>Support use cases and implementations of online video clips</Description><Identifier>_4627e3e2-6095-11e8-a329-b937fe613715</Identifier><SequenceIndicator>B</SequenceIndicator><Stakeholder><Name/><Description/></Stakeholder><OtherInformation>The Clip schema definition should be reviewed to ensure that it supports use cases and implementations of online video clips.See also: * schema.org issue tracker #1686 * Tracey's notes in Github from Sept meeting.* Added #1 rough cut to Schema.org github (staged on webschemas.org)</OtherInformation><Objective><Name>TV News Claims/Written Responses</Name><Description>Conduct written fact checks of TV news video claims</Description><Identifier>_4627e478-6095-11e8-a329-b937fe613715</Identifier><SequenceIndicator>Use Case 1</SequenceIndicator><Stakeholder><Name/><Description/></Stakeholder><OtherInformation>Written fact check of a TV news video moment -- PolitiFact reviews a claim made a half hour into a presidential debate; the debate was aired on three news networks.  The clips also appeared in other news segments the next day.  All of these broadcasts exist in the TV News Archive.Candidate design: see link in #1686, </OtherInformation></Objective><Objective><Name>Individual Claims/Written Responses</Name><Description>Review claims made multiple times at various rallies and public speeches</Description><Identifier>_4627e54a-6095-11e8-a329-b937fe613715</Identifier><SequenceIndicator>Use Case 2</SequenceIndicator><Stakeholder><Name/><Description/></Stakeholder><OtherInformation>Written fact check of recurring individual talking point -- PolitiFact reviews a claim that has been made multiple times at various rallies and public speeches.  Several of these speeches have been captured by the TV News Archive as part of larger programs.  Some of the speeches have not been captured by the TV News Archive, but were recorded by event attendees and posted to YouTube or Facebook Live</OtherInformation></Objective><Objective><Name>Multi-Party Claims/Written Responses</Name><Description>Review claims made by multiple sources in multiple locations</Description><Identifier>_4627e5ea-6095-11e8-a329-b937fe613715</Identifier><SequenceIndicator>Use Case 3</SequenceIndicator><Stakeholder><Name/><Description/></Stakeholder><OtherInformation>Written fact check of widespread talking point -- PolitiFact reviews a claim that has been made by multiple different sources in multiple locations (e.g. as pundits or surrogates on news networks, in public speeches, in Tweets).</OtherInformation></Objective><Objective><Name>Tweet Claims/Written Responses</Name><Description>Review claims made in tweets aired on TV news</Description><Identifier>_4627e694-6095-11e8-a329-b937fe613715</Identifier><SequenceIndicator>Use Case 4</SequenceIndicator><Stakeholder StakeholderTypeType="Organization"><Name>Twittter</Name><Description/></Stakeholder><Stakeholder StakeholderTypeType="Generic_Group"><Name>TV News Reporters</Name><Description/></Stakeholder><OtherInformation>Written fact check of a broadcast tweet -- PolitiFact reviews a claim made in a tweet that was aired on TV news.</OtherInformation></Objective><Objective><Name>Written Claims/Video Responses</Name><Description>Televise reviews of claims made in writing.</Description><Identifier>_4627e748-6095-11e8-a329-b937fe613715</Identifier><SequenceIndicator>Use Case 5</SequenceIndicator><Stakeholder><Name/><Description/></Stakeholder><OtherInformation>Video fact check of a non-video claim -- CNN reviews a claim made in a written format.  The review itself is broadcast on television.</OtherInformation></Objective><Objective><Name>Video Claims &amp; Responses</Name><Description>Televise reviews of claims made in video broadcast events</Description><Identifier>_4627e888-6095-11e8-a329-b937fe613715</Identifier><SequenceIndicator>Use Case 6</SequenceIndicator><Stakeholder><Name/><Description/></Stakeholder><OtherInformation>Video fact check of a video claim -- CNN reviews a claim made in a broadcast event (e.g. a claim made in a debate). The review itself is broadcast and contains a re-airing of the claim in question.</OtherInformation></Objective><Objective><Name>Written Claims/Multi-Media Responses</Name><Description>Televise and also publish written reviews of claims made in writing.</Description><Identifier>_4627e946-6095-11e8-a329-b937fe613715</Identifier><SequenceIndicator>Use Case 7</SequenceIndicator><Stakeholder><Name/><Description/></Stakeholder><OtherInformation>Multimedia fact check of a non-video claim -- CNN reviews a claim made in a written format.  The review itself is broadcast on television, and is also written on cnn.com. The written version may or may not contain the aired version.</OtherInformation></Objective></Goal></StrategicPlanCore><AdministrativeInformation><StartDate>2017-09-30</StartDate><PublicationDate>2018-05-25</PublicationDate><Source>https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_YxG42aEbhu33ZoZDPX0oTkKN7tr1B_5gYH33LJYIZk/edit#heading=h.4elx2n6h9gmt</Source><Submitter><GivenName>Owen</GivenName><Surname>Ambur</Surname><PhoneNumber/><EmailAddress>Owen.Ambur@verizon.net</EmailAddress></Submitter></AdministrativeInformation></StrategicPlan>
