---
title: "A Journalist's OSINT Workflow: Verifying Breaking News in Ten Minutes"
description: "Cross-check breaking news against ship traffic, flight data, satellite fire detection, internet outages, and webcams with this OSINT workflow."
metaTitle: "OSINT Breaking News Verification Workflow | World Monitor"
keywords: "OSINT verification techniques, verify breaking news, OSINT for journalists, open source verification tools, fact-checking breaking news, news verification workflow"
audience: "Journalists, fact-checkers, newsroom researchers, OSINT analysts, media literacy educators"
heroImage: "/blog/images/blog/verify-breaking-news-osint-workflow-journalists.jpg"
pubDate: "2026-06-04"
modifiedDate: "2026-06-13"
---

A claim appears on social media: explosion at a major Gulf port, multiple casualties, operations halted. Three accounts are posting the same shaky video. Your editor wants to know if it is real, and wants to know now.

The traditional answer is to call sources and wait. The OSINT answer is that a real explosion at a real port leaves fingerprints in half a dozen independent datasets within minutes, and checking them takes less time than the phone call. Here is the workflow, using layers that all live on [one free dashboard](/blog/posts/osint-for-everyone-open-source-intelligence-democratized/).

The principle underneath it: **independent sensors do not coordinate to lie.** One video can be old, mislocated, or generated. Ship transponders, satellite fire detection, flight tracking, and internet telemetry have no narrative agenda, and faking all of them at once is beyond almost any actor.

## Minute 0–2: Read the News Field, Not the Post

Before touching physical data, establish what the information environment is doing. Pull up the location's news and check:

- **Source diversity.** Is the claim carried only by anonymous accounts, or has it reached wire services and regional outlets? World Monitor aggregates 77 sources across world, regional, defense, and government categories, including outlets in the region's own press sphere, in [21 languages](/blog/posts/worldmonitor-in-21-languages-global-intelligence-for-everyone/).
- **Velocity.** GDELT-powered topic feeds show whether coverage volume is spiking or flat. A genuine mass-casualty event produces a near-vertical velocity curve. A recycled video produces social chatter with no news-side echo.
- **Hotspot status.** If the location is one of the 29 tracked hotspots, has its escalation score moved? The score fuses news activity (35%), country instability (25%), geographic convergence (25%), and military activity (15%); movement here means multiple systems agree something changed.

None of this confirms the event. It tells you how seriously to take the next eight minutes.

## Minute 2–5: Check the Physical Signals

Now the part most newsrooms skip: instruments that would have to be lying for the claim to be false.

**Ship traffic (AIS).** A port explosion shows up in vessel behavior immediately: ships holding offshore, departures stopping, density dropping. World Monitor aggregates live AIS into a density grid and flags cells deviating more than 30% from their rolling baseline. Also check **dark ship events**: vessels whose transponders went silent for over an hour in a monitored region. One honest caveat: terrestrial AIS coverage is strongest in European and Atlantic waters and thinner in parts of the Gulf and Asia. Absence of AIS anomaly is weak evidence; presence is strong.

**Thermal anomalies (FIRMS).** NASA's VIIRS satellites detect heat signatures globally. A large explosion or subsequent fire appears as a thermal hotspot at the exact coordinates, with a timestamp you can compare against the video's claimed time. This is the same layer used to track [wildfires and other disasters](/blog/posts/natural-disaster-monitoring-earthquakes-fires-volcanoes/), and it does not care what anyone tweeted.

**Seismic data.** Major industrial explosions register on USGS seismographs. The Beirut port explosion measured as a magnitude-3.3 event. For a "massive explosion" claim, a silent seismic record near a station network is a real red flag.

**Aviation.** Authorities close airspace around genuine incidents. Check airport delay status and closures (111 monitored airports, plus NOTAM-based closures across the MENA region) and whether flight paths are suddenly routing around the area. GPS jamming overlays add another tell in conflict-adjacent regions.

**Internet connectivity.** Infrastructure damage and government responses both show up in Cloudflare Radar outage data. A localized connectivity drop at the claimed location and time is strong corroboration; nationwide throttling suggests a state response, itself a story.

## Minute 5–8: Context and Convergence

Individual signals can each have innocent explanations. The question is whether they converge.

World Monitor runs this logic automatically: its geographic convergence detector flags any one-degree cell where **three or more independent event types** (protests, military flights, naval vessels, earthquakes) cluster within 24 hours. If the dashboard has already flagged a convergence zone at your location, multiple instruments agree before you even started checking.

Then place the event in its context with the country's brief and [instability score](/blog/posts/country-risk-monitoring-workflow-for-analysts/): a port explosion in a country at CII 75 during active conflict carries a different prior than the same claim somewhere at 30. Context does not validate the claim; it calibrates how much corroboration you should demand.

## Minute 8–10: Look at It

Sometimes you can simply look. World Monitor streams 22 live webcams from geopolitical hotspots (Tehran, Tel Aviv, Kyiv, Taipei, and others) plus seven live news channels. If the claimed event is in view of a camera, you have a primary source with a timestamp. Even nearby cameras help: a city skyline behaving completely normally fifteen minutes after a claimed "massive explosion" is evidence too.

## What This Workflow Catches, and What It Does Not

It reliably catches: recycled footage from past events, mislocated videos, exaggerated scale, and fabricated events at instrumented locations. It struggles with: small events below sensor thresholds, regions with poor AIS and camera coverage, and anything where the claim is about intent rather than physics. The workflow tells you *whether something happened*; the *why* still needs reporting.

For ongoing stories, the platform's snapshot system keeps seven days of history, so you can scrub back to what the map looked like before, during, and after the event window. That is useful when you write the timeline. Teams that want machine assistance can run the same checks programmatically: the [MCP server](/blog/posts/worldmonitor-mcp-server-ai-agents-real-time-intelligence/) exposes maritime activity, conflict events, and news intelligence as tools, so a newsroom agent can pre-assemble the evidence file while the desk is still arguing about the headline.

## Frequently Asked Questions

**What is OSINT verification?**

Open-source intelligence verification is the practice of testing claims against publicly available data, including satellite detections, ship and flight transponders, seismic records, connectivity telemetry, and primary imagery, rather than relying on the claim's own provenance.

**What free tools can journalists use to verify breaking news?**

USGS (earthquakes), NASA FIRMS (thermal anomalies), Cloudflare Radar (internet outages), public AIS aggregators (ship traffic), and flight-tracking services each cover one signal. World Monitor's value is having all of them as layers on one map, with anomaly detection such as convergence flags, density alerts, and dark-ship events running continuously.

**How fast can an event be verified with open sources?**

Physical signals appear within minutes (AIS behavior, airspace changes, connectivity drops) to a few hours (satellite thermal passes). The ten-minute workflow establishes a confidence level immediately and identifies which confirming signal to wait for.

---

**Bookmark [worldmonitor.app](https://worldmonitor.app) next to your CMS. The next time a claim breaks, run the ten minutes before the call. Your editor gets "three independent signals corroborate" instead of "Twitter says."**
