Gap Analysis

Version 1.1 by Robert Schaub on 2025/12/19 16:13

Gap Analysis - User Needs & Requirements

Status: ✅ Analysis Complete  
Purpose: Identify missing features by comparing against global research and best practices

-

1. Analysis Framework

1.1 Importance Formula

Importance = f(risk, impact, strategy)

  • Risk: What are the consequences if we don't have this feature?
  • Impact: How many users affected? How severe?
  • Strategy: How well does this align with FactHarbor's mission and strategic goals?

Importance Levels:

  • VERY HIGH: Critical to mission, high risk if missing, affects majority of users
  • HIGH: Important for success, significant impact, strong strategic alignment
  • MEDIUM: Valuable but not critical, moderate impact
  • LOW: Nice-to-have, limited impact

-

1.2 Urgency Formula

Urgency = f(fail fast and learn, legal, promises made)

  • Fail fast and learn: Do we need to validate assumptions quickly?
  • Legal: Are there legal requirements or external deadlines?
  • Promises made: Have we committed this to stakeholders, funders, or partners?

Urgency Levels:

  • HIGH: External deadlines, legal requirements, or critical testing needed
  • MEDIUM: Strategic opportunity, growing trends, competitive pressure
  • LOW: No external pressure, can add anytime

-

1.3 Context Matters

Important principle: Importance and urgency change based on milestone context.

  • POC: Only basic features urgent
  • Beta: More features become urgent for user testing
  • Release: Legal/compliance becomes critical

Priorities are not absolute - they're contextual.

-

2. Gap Categories

We identified 18 gaps across 8 categories:

Category 1: Accessibility & Inclusivity

  • Gap 1.1: WCAG 2.1 Compliance
  • Gap 1.2: Multilingual Support

Category 2: Platform Integration & Distribution

  • Gap 2.1: Browser Extensions
  • Gap 2.2: Embeddable Widgets
  • Gap 2.3: ClaimReview Schema

Category 3: Media Verification

  • Gap 3.1: Image/Video/Audio Verification

Category 4: Mobile & Offline Access

  • Gap 4.1: Mobile Apps / PWA
  • Gap 4.2: Offline Access

Category 5: Education & Media Literacy

  • Gap 5.1: Educational Resources
  • Gap 5.2: Media Literacy Integration

Category 6: Collaboration & Community

  • Gap 6.1: Professional Collaboration Tools
  • Gap 6.2: Community Discussion

Category 7: Export & Sharing

  • Gap 7.1: Export Capabilities
  • Gap 7.2: Social Sharing Optimization

Category 8: Advanced Features & Analytics

  • Gap 8.1: User Analytics
  • Gap 8.2: Personalization
  • Gap 8.3: Media Archiving
  • Gap 8.4: Advanced Search

-

3. Critical Gaps

3.1 Gap: WCAG 2.1 Accessibility Compliance

Status: ❌ Not addressed in current requirements  
Importance: VERY HIGH  
Urgency: HIGH (legal requirement)

Why Important:

  • Risk: CRITICAL
  • Legal liability (European Accessibility Act enforced June 28, 2025)
  • Lawsuits, fines up to $250,000 (Accessible Canada Act)
  • Cannot operate in EU market without compliance
  • Retrofitting is 100x more expensive than building in from start
  • Impact: 15-20% of population (1+ billion people) excluded without accessibility
  • Affects blind, low-vision, deaf, motor impairments, cognitive disabilities
  • "86% of companies report improved customer satisfaction after implementing accessibility" (Forrester)
  • Strategy: CRITICAL ALIGNMENT
  • Mission: "empower users to make informed judgments" - cannot empower if inaccessible
  • Vision: "a world where decisions are grounded in evidence" - for ALL people
  • Inclusivity is core to nonprofit mission

Why Urgent:

  • Legal: VERY HIGH
  • European Accessibility Act (EAA) enforced June 28, 2025
  • Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) - ongoing requirement in US
  • Accessible Canada Act - penalties up to $250,000
  • Cannot launch in EU without compliance
  • Fail fast: Not applicable (accessibility is proven requirement, not experimental)
  • Promises: Depends on public mission statements and funding commitments

Missing Requirements:

  • WCAG 2.1 Level AA compliance
  • Screen reader compatibility (ARIA labels, semantic HTML)
  • Keyboard navigation (no mouse required)
  • Color-blind friendly design (not relying solely on color)
  • Adjustable text size and contrast
  • Captions/transcripts for video content
  • Alternative text for images and visualizations

Recommended New Requirements:

  • NFR6: Accessibility - Platform must conform to WCAG 2.1 Level AA standards
  • NFR7: Assistive Technology Support - Compatible with screen readers, voice navigation, keyboard-only usage
  • FR14: Accessibility Settings - User-configurable contrast, text size, reduced motion options

When to Address: Must be built into platform from start (retrofitting prohibitively expensive)

Research Evidence:

  • "72% of organizations have digital accessibility policy, 85% see it as competitive advantage" (Level Access 2024)
  • European Accessibility Act (EAA) enforcement begins June 28, 2025
  • "Accessible websites see 20% increase in traffic and engagement" (W3C WAI)
  • "86% of companies report improved customer satisfaction after implementing accessibility" (Forrester)

-

3.2 Gap: Educational Resources & Onboarding

Status: ❌ Not addressed in current requirements  
Importance: VERY HIGH  
Urgency: HIGH (critical for adoption)

Why Important:

  • Risk: CRITICAL
  • Platform fails if users cannot understand Evidence Models
  • Misinterpretation of scenarios/verdicts undermines mission
  • High abandonment rate without onboarding (industry standard: 75% drop-off without onboarding)
  • Wasted investment if no one can use the platform
  • Impact: Affects 100% of new users
  • "Fact-checking organizations increasingly provide media literacy education" (Mesquita et al. 2024)
  • Determines whether platform succeeds or fails
  • Strategy: CRITICAL ALIGNMENT
  • Mission: "help people make sense of complex, contested information"
  • Vision: Requires users to understand methodology
  • Cannot achieve transparency without explaining concepts

Why Urgent:

  • Fail fast: VERY HIGH
  • Must validate that Evidence Models are comprehensible to users
  • Need to test if onboarding actually works
  • Quick iteration needed based on user confusion
  • Test with beta users before full launch
  • Legal: None
  • Promises: HIGH if public statements include "user-friendly" or "accessible to all"

Missing Requirements:

  • Onboarding tutorial (interactive walkthrough)
  • Video tutorials explaining concepts
  • FAQ section
  • Glossary (scenarios, confidence scores, verdicts, assumptions)
  • Example analyses with explanations
  • "How to read a FactHarbor analysis" guide
  • Best practices documentation

Recommended New Requirements:

  • UN-23: Learn How to Fact-Check - Educational resources for understanding methodology
  • FR26: Onboarding Tutorial - Interactive first-time user walkthrough
  • FR27: Educational Resources Hub - Guides, videos, FAQs, glossary
  • FR28: Curriculum Materials - Resources for educators to use FactHarbor in classrooms

When to Address: Basic onboarding at launch (POC needs 1-page explainer, Beta needs comprehensive resources)

Research Evidence:

  • "Critical media literacy fosters resilience against misinformation" (McDougall 2019)
  • Teen Fact-Checking Networks operating globally (MediaWise 2024)
  • "Fact-checking organizations increasingly provide media literacy education" (Mesquita et al. 2024)

-

4. High Importance Gaps

4.1 Gap: Browser Extensions

Status: ❌ Not addressed  
Importance: HIGH  
Urgency: MEDIUM

Why Important:

  • Risk: MEDIUM - Competitive disadvantage, reduced adoption
  • Impact: MEDIUM-HIGH - Significantly improves UX for active fact-checkers
  • Strategy: HIGH ALIGNMENT - Meet users where misinformation spreads (in their browsers)

Why Urgent:

  • Fail fast: MEDIUM - Should validate that users actually want browser extensions
  • Legal: None
  • Promises: LOW unless explicitly promised to early adopters

Missing Requirements:

  • Chrome/Firefox/Safari browser extensions
  • Right-click context menu for selected text
  • Inline highlighting of claims on any webpage
  • Quick verdict tooltips without leaving page
  • Save/bookmark fact-checks

Recommended:

  • UN-18: In-Context Fact-Checking - Browser extension for real-time verification
  • FR17: Browser Extensions - Chrome, Firefox, Safari with context menu
  • FR18: Cross-Site Highlighting - Highlight and analyze claims on any website

When to Address: Test web platform first, then build extension MVP if user demand validated

Research Evidence:

  • "3-click verification: Select → Right-click → Verify" is standard UX pattern
  • Extensions like UnCovered, Pino, InVID/WeVerify widely adopted
  • NewsGuard browser extension demonstrates market acceptance

-

4.2 Gap: Media Verification (Images/Videos/Audio)

Status: ❌ Not addressed  
Importance: VERY HIGH  
Urgency: MEDIUM

Why Important:

  • Risk: HIGH - Cannot address major category of misinformation (visual/audio)
  • Impact: VERY HIGH - Visual misinformation is primary vector
  • Strategy: CRITICAL ALIGNMENT - Mission incomplete without multimedia fact-checking

Why Urgent:

  • Fail fast: VERY HIGH - Should test approach quickly (partner vs. build?)
  • Legal: None
  • Promises: MEDIUM (depends on mission statements)

Missing Requirements:

  • Reverse image search integration
  • Video frame extraction and analysis
  • Audio deepfake detection
  • EXIF metadata extraction
  • Synthetic media detection (AI-generated content)

Recommended:

  • UN-20: Media Verification - Image, video, audio fact-checking
  • FR22: Image Verification - Reverse search, EXIF, synthetic detection
  • FR23: Video Verification - Frame analysis, metadata, deepfake detection
  • FR24: Audio Verification - Voice deepfakes, audio forensics

When to Address: Pilot with existing tools (InVID, TinEye) before building in-house

Research Evidence:

  • "Most deception relies on decontextualization" of images (Cazzamatta 2025)
  • "Deepfakes targeting political figures raise concerns" (Corsi et al. 2024)
  • InVID/WeVerify used by professional fact-checkers (AFP 2024)

-

4.3 Gap: Multilingual Support

Status: ❌ Not addressed  
Importance: HIGH  
Urgency: MEDIUM

Why Important:

  • Risk: HIGH - Mission limited to English speakers (20% of world)
  • Impact: VERY HIGH - Excludes 80% of world population
  • Strategy: CRITICAL ALIGNMENT - Vision of "a world where decisions are grounded in evidence" - not just English-speaking world

Why Urgent:

  • Fail fast: MEDIUM - Test which languages users need, validate translation quality early
  • Legal: None
  • Promises: MEDIUM-HIGH if mission statement emphasizes "global" or "world"

Missing Requirements:

  • Interface available in multiple languages
  • Content translation/analysis in non-English languages
  • Right-to-left (RTL) language support (Arabic, Hebrew)
  • Locale-specific formatting (dates, numbers, currencies)
  • Character encoding for non-Latin scripts

Recommended:

  • FR15: Multilingual Interface - UI in 10+ languages
  • FR16: Multilingual Content Analysis - AKEL analyzes claims in multiple languages
  • NFR8: Internationalization (i18n) - RTL support, character encodings, locale formatting

When to Address: Plan early, prove English platform first, start with 2-3 strategic languages

Research Evidence:

  • 443 fact-checking projects operate in 70+ languages globally (Duke 2025)
  • "LLMs better at fact-checking in low-resource languages than expected" (ACL 2024)
  • "Multilingual capabilities essential for global inclusivity" (O3 World 2024)

-

4.4 Gap: Mobile Apps / PWA

Status: ❌ Not addressed  
Importance: HIGH  
Urgency: LOW

Why Important:

  • Risk: MEDIUM - Reduced engagement, poor mobile experience
  • Impact: HIGH - 90%+ users access news on mobile
  • Strategy: MEDIUM - Better UX but not core to methodology

Why Urgent:

  • Fail fast: MEDIUM - Test if mobile users behave differently, PWA first
  • Legal: None
  • Promises: LOW unless specified in grants/partnerships

Missing Requirements:

  • iOS/Android native apps
  • Progressive Web App (PWA) capabilities
  • Camera submission for visual claims
  • Push notifications
  • Offline mode

Recommended:

  • UN-21: Mobile-Native Experience - Native apps for iOS/Android
  • FR25: Native Mobile Apps - Full mobile capabilities
  • NFR9: Progressive Web App - Installable, offline, push notifications

When to Address: Responsive web first, PWA to test mobile patterns, native apps if validated

Research Evidence:

  • "Mobile apps with accessibility features experience 30% higher engagement" (MMA 2024)
  • 90%+ of adults access news via mobile devices (Pew 2024)

-

4.5 Gap: ClaimReview Schema

Status: ❌ Not addressed  
Importance: HIGH  
Urgency: LOW

Why Important:

  • Risk: LOW-MEDIUM - Reduced discoverability (won't appear in Google search)
  • Impact: MEDIUM-HIGH - Affects all users via SEO
  • Strategy: MEDIUM - Distribution mechanism, not core methodology

Why Urgent:

  • Fail fast: LOW - Already proven by 200,000+ fact-checks globally
  • Legal: None
  • Promises: None

Missing Requirements:

  • ClaimReview structured data markup
  • Submit to Google Fact Check Explorer
  • MediaReview for multimedia content

Recommended:

  • FR20: ClaimReview Schema - Structured data markup
  • FR21: Search Engine Integration - Submit to fact-check indexes

When to Address: Add anytime after content library exists (can be retroactive)

Research Evidence:

  • 200,000+ fact-checks use ClaimReview globally (Duke 2024)
  • Enables appearance in Google/Bing search results

-

5. Medium Importance Gaps

5.1 Gap: Embeddable Widgets

Importance: MEDIUM  
Urgency: LOW

Missing: JavaScript widgets for publishers to embed fact-checks

When: Only if publishers commit to using it

-

5.2 Gap: Export Capabilities

Importance: MEDIUM  
Urgency: LOW

Missing: PDF export, print optimization, CSV/JSON data export

When: Based on user requests

-

5.3 Gap: Professional Collaboration Tools

Importance: MEDIUM  
Urgency: LOW

Missing: Organization workspaces, claim assignment, internal discussion

When: Only if organizations commit

-

5.4 Gap: Social Sharing Optimization

Importance: MEDIUM  
Urgency: LOW

Missing: Open Graph tags, Twitter Cards, short URLs, WhatsApp optimization

When: Iterative improvement based on usage

-

5.5 Gap: Media Archiving

Importance: MEDIUM  
Urgency: LOW

Missing: Automatic archiving of sources, Wayback Machine integration, media preservation

When: After launch, retroactive archiving is fine

Research Evidence:

  • "Images/videos often disappear after fact-checking" (MediaVault 2024)
  • IFCN DisinfoArchiving uses WACZ format (InVID 2024-2025)

-

6. Lower Priority Gaps

6.1 Gap: User Analytics

Importance: MEDIUM  
Urgency: LOW

Missing: Privacy-respecting usage analytics, feedback systems

-

6.2 Gap: Personalization

Importance: LOW  
Urgency: N/A

Strategic Decision Needed: How much personalization without creating filter bubbles?

Recommendation: Limited only (language, accessibility preferences) - NO content filtering

-

6.3 Gap: Community Discussion

Importance: LOW  
Urgency: N/A

Strategic Decision Needed: Should FactHarbor allow public comments or remain evidence-focused?

Question to resolve: Evidence platform vs. community platform?

-

6.4 Gap: Advanced Search

Importance: MEDIUM  
Urgency: LOW

Missing: Elasticsearch, faceted search, advanced filters

When: Only when PostgreSQL search becomes bottleneck

-

6.5 Gap: Offline Access

Importance: LOW  
Urgency: LOW

Missing: Offline mode, service workers, cached content

When: If user research shows demand

-

-

7. Existing Requirements Reference

Before proposing new requirements, here's what already exists in the FactHarbor Specification:

7.1 Existing Functional Requirements (FR1-FR13)

From Specification/Requirements.WebHome:

  • FR1: Claim Intake - Users submit claims via form or API
  • FR2: Claim Normalization - Standardize to clear assertion format
  • FR3: Claim Classification - Domain, type, risk score, complexity
  • FR4: Scenario Generation - AKEL analyzes claim and generates scenarios
  • FR5: Evidence Linking - Automated evidence discovery and relevance scoring
  • FR6: Scenario Comparison - Side-by-side comparison interface
  • FR7: Automated Verdicts - AKEL generates verdict based on evidence
  • FR8: Time Evolution - Claims update as new evidence emerges
  • FR9: Publication Workflow - Simple automated flow (no multi-stage approval)
  • FR10: Moderation - Focus on abuse, not routine quality
  • FR11: Audit Trail - All edits logged, version history public

From User Needs Document (UN-17):

  • FR12: Two-Panel Summary View - Analysis + Article side-by-side
  • FR13: In-Article Claim Highlighting - Visual claim markers in original text

Total Existing: FR1-FR13 (13 functional requirements)

-

7.2 Existing Non-Functional Requirements (NFR1-NFR5)

From Specification/Requirements.WebHome:

  • NFR1: Performance - Processing <30s, search <2s, page load <3s, 99% uptime
  • NFR2: Scalability - Handle 10K claims initially, scale to 1M+, 100K+ concurrent users
  • NFR3: Transparency - All algorithms open source, all data exportable, all decisions documented
  • NFR4: Security & Privacy - Follow privacy policy, secure authentication, data encryption, regular audits
  • NFR5: Maintainability - Modular architecture, automated testing, CI/CD, comprehensive documentation

Total Existing: NFR1-NFR5 (5 non-functional requirements)

-

7.3 Requirement Numbering Summary

Existing Requirements:

  • Functional: FR1 through FR13
  • Non-Functional: NFR1 through NFR5

Proposed New Requirements (from Gap Analysis):

  • Functional: FR14 through FR43 (30 new)
  • Non-Functional: NFR6 through NFR10 (5 new)

Total After Gap Analysis:

  • Functional: FR1-FR43 (43 total)
  • Non-Functional: NFR1-NFR10 (10 total)

-

Based on gap analysis, we recommend adding:

8 New User Needs (UN-18 through UN-25):

  • UN-18: In-Context Fact-Checking (browser extension)
  • UN-19: Publisher Integration (embed widgets)
  • UN-20: Media Verification (images/videos/audio)
  • UN-21: Mobile-Native Experience (native apps)
  • UN-22: Offline Access (PWA)
  • UN-23: Learn How to Fact-Check (education)
  • UN-24: Professional Collaboration (team tools)
  • UN-25: Export & Save (PDF, CSV)

30 New Functional Requirements (FR14-FR43):

  • FR14: Accessibility Settings
  • FR15-16: Multilingual (Interface, Content Analysis)
  • FR17-18: Browser Extensions, Cross-Site Highlighting
  • FR19-20: Embeddable Widget, ClaimReview Schema
  • FR21: Search Engine Integration
  • FR22-24: Media Verification (Image, Video, Audio)
  • FR25: Native Mobile Apps
  • FR26-30: Education (Onboarding, Resources, Curriculum, Critical Thinking, Pre-bunking)
  • FR31-33: Professional Collaboration (Workspaces, Assignment, Discussion)
  • FR34-36: Export (PDF, Print, Data)
  • FR37-39: Social Sharing (Open Graph, Short URLs, Multi-Channel)
  • FR40: User Feedback System
  • FR41-43: Archiving (Automatic, Archive.org, Media Preservation)

5 New Non-Functional Requirements (NFR6-NFR10):

  • NFR6: Accessibility (WCAG 2.1 AA)
  • NFR7: Assistive Technology Support
  • NFR8: Internationalization (i18n)
  • NFR9: Progressive Web App (PWA)
  • NFR10: Privacy-Respecting Analytics

-

11. Priority Matrix

Priority based on Importance + Urgency:

CRITICAL (Must Address):

  1. Accessibility (WCAG) - Legal + High Impact
    2. Educational Resources - Adoption Critical

HIGH (Strategic Priority):
3. Browser Extensions - User Expectation
4. Media Verification - Mission Critical
5. Multilingual - Global Strategy

MEDIUM (Plan For):
6. Mobile Apps/PWA - User Convenience
7. ClaimReview Schema - Discoverability
8. Export Capabilities - Professional Users
9. Embeddable Widgets - Publisher Adoption
10. Professional Collaboration - Organizational Users

LOW (Consider Later):

    1. Social Sharing Optimization
      12. Media Archiving
      13. User Analytics
      14. Advanced Search
      15. Offline Access
      16. Personalization
      17. Community Discussion

-

11. Key Strategic Questions

Question 1: Accessibility Investment
How comprehensive at launch?

  • Required: WCAG 2.1 AA minimum, keyboard navigation, screen readers
  • Enhanced: Voice navigation, haptic feedback (can add later)

Question 2: Multilingual Priorities
Which languages first?

  • Recommend: English, Spanish, French, German, Arabic (major markets + diversity)
  • Consider: Chinese, Japanese, Portuguese, Hindi, Russian

Question 3: Media Verification Approach
Build vs. partner?

  • Recommend: Partner initially (InVID, TinEye, existing tools)
  • Build: If demand proven and resources available

Question 4: Community Model
Evidence-focused vs. discussion-enabled?

  • Option A: No public discussion (maintain authority model)
  • Option B: Limited discussion (Contributor+ only)
  • Option C: Open discussion (requires moderation resources)

Question 5: Mobile Strategy
Native apps vs. PWA?

  • Recommend: PWA first (cross-platform, lower cost)
  • Consider: Native apps if mobile usage dominant

-

11. Research Sources

Academic Research (2024-2025):

  • AI-Generated Misinformation (Cazzamatta & Sarısakaloğlu 2025)
  • Show Me the Work: Fact-Checkers' Requirements for Explainable AI (CHI 2025)
  • Multilingual Fact-Checking using LLMs (ACL 2024)
  • Beyond Verification: Media Literacy Education (Mesquita et al. 2024)

Industry Reports:

  • Duke Reporters' Lab Census 2024-2025 (443 projects, 70+ languages)
  • Poynter/IFCN State of Fact-Checkers Report
  • Level Access: State of Digital Accessibility Report 2023-2024
  • Pew Research Center: News consumption patterns

Standards & Compliance:

  • WCAG 2.1 (W3C)
  • European Accessibility Act (EAA) - June 28, 2025
  • Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
  • Accessible Canada Act
  • ClaimReview/MediaReview specifications (Schema.org)

-

11. Related Pages

-

Document Status: ✅ Analysis Complete - Ready for Strategic Planning