evidence: Recently, Full Fact, a non-profit partner in Facebook’s project, published an in-depth report on the first six months of its involvement in the program. Overall, the group says, third-party fact-checking is worthwhile, but the report has a number of criticisms to make about the way the project works. For example, Full Fact says, the way Facebook rates misinformation needs to change, because the terminology and categories it applies aren’t granular enough to be useful. Plus, Facebook has so far failed to speed up its flags and responses to fact checks. [...] Full Fact’s critiques are not new. Earlier this year, a number of Facebook’s fact-checking partners told the BBC that they were concerned about having no way to see whether their work was having an effect, and suggested that Facebook didn’t care about the efficacy of the project. "Are we changing minds?" a fact-checker based in Latin America wondered. "Is it having an impact? Is our work being read? I don’t think it is hard to keep track of this. But it’s not a priority for Facebook." Last year, a number of partners seemed deeply cynical about Facebook’s intentions. "They’re not taking anything seriously, Brooke Binkowski, former managing editor of fact-checking site Snopes.com, who now works for a similar site called Truth or Fiction, told The Guardian. "They are more interested in making themselves look good and passing the buck."