If you have read our recent research posts, you will have noticed a small gold box at the end: The Independent Thinking & Verification Standard. It is easy to scroll past. But it may be the most important thing on the page, so we think it deserves a post of its own.
This post explains what it is, why we added it, and why it matters for anyone trying to make sense of the world, whether you use AI every day or have never touched it.
Why this matters now
We have never had more information, and it has never been harder to know what to trust. A confident video, a well-designed graphic or a fluent paragraph can feel true long before anyone has checked it. Algorithms reward what grabs attention, not what is accurate.
Escaping the rat race is not only about money or work. It is also about getting out of the habit of letting other people do our thinking for us. Independent thinking is a form of freedom, and like any freedom, it has to be practised.
Transparency for people who use AI
We will be open: Get Out Rat Race uses AI. It helps us research, draft, create illustrations and present ideas. Some of our presenters are AI-generated, and we say so. AI lets a small, independent platform like ours produce work that would otherwise take a full team.
But AI can be wrong. It can sound certain while being mistaken, blend sources together, or reflect the biases in the material it learned from. So using AI comes with a responsibility: to be honest that we use it, and to give readers the tools to check what we publish rather than asking them to simply trust us.
That is what the verification standard is. It is not a badge saying "this is correct". It is an invitation: here is how you can test this for yourself.
Not just an AI problem
It would be easy to treat this as only an AI issue. It is not. People got things wrong long before computers. Newspapers have agendas, governments spin, experts disagree, and every one of us has blind spots shaped by where we grew up and what we want to believe.
Someone who never uses AI still needs to ask the same questions about a TV debate, a family WhatsApp forward or a speech from a politician they admire. The method stays the same whatever the source.
The CLAIM Check in brief
At the heart of the standard is a simple six-stage process we call the CLAIM Check:
- Clarify the claim — What exactly is being said? Strip away the emotion and restate it plainly.
- Label the claim — Is it a fact, an interpretation, a prediction or a value judgement? Each needs a different kind of test.
- Assess the evidence — Where does it come from? Is it original, recent and able to be checked by someone else?
- Investigate the context — What is left out? Who benefits from this framing? What do people who disagree say?
- Measure the reasoning — Does the conclusion actually follow from the evidence, or has the argument drifted?
- Make the verdict provisional — Hold your conclusion with the confidence the evidence deserves, and stay open to new information.
You do not need to run every stage on every sentence. Even asking one or two of these questions before sharing something will change how you read.
One standard for everyone, including us
The most important rule is that the standard applies to everyone equally: the speaker, the analyst, the AI tool, the creator and the reader. That includes Get Out Rat Race. If we feature someone whose views we find compelling, their claims still get examined. If we make an argument, you are encouraged to challenge it.
Applying a strict test only to people we disagree with is not critical thinking; it is just taking sides with extra steps.
Putting it into practice
- Pause before you share. Strong emotion is a signal to slow down, not speed up.
- Look for the original source, not someone's summary of it.
- Find the best version of the opposing view and read it fairly.
- Notice when an argument quietly shifts from evidence to opinion.
- Be comfortable saying "I don't know yet".
None of this makes you cynical. The goal is not to believe nothing. The goal is to believe things for good reasons, and to keep learning.
Related reading
- The Independent Thinking & Verification Standard — the full framework, stage by stage.
- The Power of Asking Better Questions — why questioning assumptions matters.
- How to Disagree Without Creating Division — questioning ideas without attacking people.
- Immigration History: Britain, Borders and Policy — a seven-stage investigation using this approach.
- Shahid Bolsen, the West and the Problem with Collective Blame — examining strong arguments fairly.
- Burkina Faso: Who Really Owns the Future? — separating evidence from narrative.