In early January, DR launched its new strategy titled 'Forskellige sammen', which aims to place democracy at the forefront of public service content and was initiated by the recently appointed director-general, Bjarne Corydon. A key aspect of this strategy is DR Verificerer, an initiative intended to provide verified information and knowledge to the Danish public. Corydon expressed that as this strategy unfolds in the coming years, ordinary Danes will gain tools to discern the truth amidst the overwhelming influx of information, thereby combating misinformation.

However, the author, Philip Larsen, raises concerns about the implications of DR's approach. The fervent push for fact-checking can potentially lead to a narrow interpretation of truth, sidelining nuanced discourse and diversity of opinions. He argues that while the intent to combat falsehoods is commendable, the method of 'insisting on facts' may inadvertently promote an 'us vs. them' mentality, which is counterproductive in a democratic society where varying perspectives should be encouraged and debated rather than dismissed outright.

Moreover, this trend is not unique to DR or Denmark; the global conversation about misinformation is intensifying in various media landscapes, indicating a broader struggle with handling facts and narratives in public discourse. The author warns that while striving for factual correctness, media institutions must remain vigilant to avoid becoming arbiters of truth themselves, which can lead to a slippery slope of censorship and exclusion of legitimate voices from the public sphere.