I will use a website assessment as my example.  The same concept applies to other situations, books, websites, articles, classes, and meeting agendas.

—the opposite of carefully reading a site’s About page, design cues, or internal links to judge credibility.  Researchers at Stanford observed that professional fact-checkers do quick scans and then open new tabs to see what other sources say about the site/claim—while students and even historians often stay on the page (“vertical reading”) and get fooled by polished logos or authoritative-sounding language.  Highlighting this process can help the audience feel more confident in their ability to evaluate sources quickly and effectively.

Below is what lateral reading looks like in practice, step by step, with realistic workflows you can follow in 1–5 minutes to verify sources efficiently and stay engaged.

1) The core idea (what you’re doing)

Goal: Don’t ask “Does this page look legit?” Instead, focus on the core idea: “What is this source, according to independent references?” This shifts attention to verifying credibility.
That means you triangulate: you corroborate a site’s reputation and a claim’s accuracy by checking multiple outside sources, not the site’s own self-description.  Highlighting this process can help the audience feel more assured about their evaluations and reduce doubts about credibility.

This is precisely why lateral reading fits inside the SIFT method’s “Investigate the Source” and “Find Better Coverage” steps.

The SIFT Method is a digital literacy strategy for quickly evaluating online information, standing for Stop, Investigate the source, Find better coverage, and Trace claims to their original context, developed by researcher Mike Caulfield.  It teaches users to pause before reacting emotionally, check the reputations of publishers and authors (not just the website), find other sources for the same story, and review the original reporting or evidence to understand the full context, helping them spot misinformation and ideological bias effectively. 

SIFT is the framework; lateral reading is the fact-checker’s habit that powers the “I” and “F” steps—leaving the page to verify reputation and corroborate claims, empowering users to evaluate sources confidently. 

2) The “Two‑Minute Lateral Reading” routine

Step A — Do a 10-second “sniff test,” then leave

Scan: What is the domain?  Who is the author?  What’s the claim?  Then open new tabs immediately—don’t get pulled into the article first. 

Step B — Open 2–4 tabs (minimum)

Fact-checkers open tabs to answer two questions:

(1) Who is this source? 

(2) Is this claim corroborated? 

Step C — Run 3 quick searches (copy/paste templates)

Use searches like these (replace the bracketed text):

1) [site name or domain] + Wikipedia

2) [site name or domain] + "funding" OR "owner" OR "about"

3) [“exact claim phrase”] + (site: gov OR site:edu OR major outlet name)

This “read around the source” approach is explicitly taught in Stanford’s lateral reading materials and aligns with SIFT’s “Investigate” + “Find better coverage.”

Step D — Decide fast: reputable/uncertain/unreliable

We are not writing a dissertation—we are making a triage decision:

• Reputable: transparent ownership, track record, and other credible outlets treating it seriously.
• Uncertain: unclear ownership or mixed reputation → don’t share; keep checking.
• Unreliable: known misinformation, no transparency, or only self-citation → ignore or label as unverified. 

3) What it looks like in real scenarios (walkthroughs)

Scenario 1 — You land on a site you’ve never heard of

What vertical readers do: click “About,” admire design, assume legitimacy.

What lateral readers do instead:

·         Open a new tab and search the domain/name. 

·         Look for third-party descriptions: encyclopedia entries, watchdog write-ups, credible reporting about the outlet, or academic/library references. 

·         Check ownership/funding signals via outside sources (not the site’s own claims). 

Decision rule: If you can’t quickly establish who runs it and whether it has standards, treat it as unverified and switch to “Find better coverage.”

Scenario 2 — A viral claim with a single source

This is where lateral reading shines because it decouples the claim from the article.

Steps:

·         Copy the core factual claim (not the headline). 

·         Search it and look for independent corroboration (multiple credible sources, official docs, or named experts). 

·         If only fringe sites repeat it, that’s a red flag—SIFT calls for better coverage before belief or sharing. 

·         Then trace it: find the original report, dataset, transcript, or primary statement (SIFT’s “Trace claims”). 

Scenario 3 — A quote attributed to a public figure (often clipped or altered)

Lateral reading is: “Where else does this quote appear, and what’s the original context?”

Steps:

·         Search the quote in quotation marks:

“the exact quote here”

·         Look for the earliest credible appearance and the complete transcript/video/doc. 

·         Compare what the original says vs. the meme/screenshot—SIFT explicitly recommends tracing quotes/media back to the original context. 

Scenario 4 — An image that “proves” something

Lateral reading for images means you don’t argue about what you see—you verify where else it’s been used.

Steps:

·         Reverse image search (Google Images/Lens is a common first step). 

·         Find earliest postings and original captions; check whether it’s reused out of context (a typical misinformation pattern). 

·         If it’s a video, grab a key frame and reverse search that frame (a standard newsroom verification move). 

4) What to pay attention to during lateral reading (the “signals”)

When you open those outside tabs, you’re looking for independent reputation markers, such as:

• Who owns it / funds it (and whether that’s transparent). 
• Track record: Have credible sources cited it approvingly or flagged it as unreliable? 
• Editorial standards: corrections policy, named editors, clear labeling of opinion vs news (journalism training emphasizes these standards). 

And importantly, you’re avoiding a classic trap Stanford researchers identified: being persuaded by “credible-looking” surface features on the site itself. 

5) Common mistakes (and how to avoid them)

Mistake #1: Spending time reading the full article first

That’s how people get “pulled in.” Lateral reading is about leaving early to check reputation and corroboration. 

Mistake #2: Trusting the “About” page as evidence

Self-description is marketing; lateral reading uses outside sources to evaluate credibility. 

Mistake #3: Confusing repetition with verification

Ten sites repeating the same claim might be part of a copy-and-paste chain.  SIFT pushes you to “Find better coverage” and “Trace claims” to the original. 

6) A simple “lateral reading checklist” you can memorize

LATERAL READING IN PRACTICE

 1) Leave the page (open new tabs)

2) Who is the source?  (reputation via third parties)

3) Who funds/owns it?  (outside confirmation)

4) Is there better coverage elsewhere?

5) Can I trace the claim to an original doc/video/data?

This maps directly onto Stanford’s lateral reading approach and the SIFT framework used in media literacy education. 

SIFT and lateral reading are not competing methods—they’re stacked.

• SIFT is the overall decision framework for evaluating online information quickly: Stop → Investigate → Find better coverage → Trace.
• Lateral reading is the core technique you use inside SIFT, especially during Investigate the Source and Find Better Coverage, by leaving the page to see what independent sources say. 

Below is the practical relationship, step by step.

1) The most straightforward way to say it

SIFT = the playbook.  Lateral reading = the signature move.

Professional fact-checkers were observed using lateral reading—opening new tabs and checking the wider web—rather than trusting what a page says about itself.
SIFT codifies that behavior into a repeatable workflow: pause, investigate, corroborate, trace. 

2) Where lateral reading fits inside SIFT (a direct mapping)

S — Stop

This step is about interrupting the impulse to react/share so you don’t get “hooked” by emotional framing.
Lateral reading connection: Stopping creates space for lateral reading rather than scrolling deeper into the persuasive page. 

I — Investigate the Source

SIFT explicitly tells you to evaluate the source’s credibility and context.
This is where lateral reading is most literal: Stanford’s Digital Inquiry Group teaches that the best way to learn about a website is to leave it and see what other sources say—because a site’s own “About” page is self-marketing. 

In practice, “Investigate” = lateral read the source:

• Open new tabs
• Search the outlet/author
• Check independent descriptions (e.g., Wikipedia, reputable reporting, watchdog orgs)

F — Find Better Coverage

SIFT emphasizes verifying the claim by finding more reliable coverage elsewhere, not by getting lost in the original page.
This is lateral reading at the claim level: you set aside the page and ask, “Do credible sources report this too?”

Stanford’s approach similarly trains learners to cross-check what the rest of the web says—fact-checkers don’t “debate” a page; they triangulate across sources.  [workshop-p....icwsm.org], [vsquare.org]

T — Trace Claims to the Original Context

SIFT tells you to trace quotes, images, and assertions back to their primary source and original context.
Lateral reading overlap: tracing often requires leaving the page again—following citation chains outward until you hit:

• the original document,
• the full transcript,
• the dataset,
• the unedited video,
• or the first upload instance. 

3) The key difference (so you don’t confuse them)

SIFT answers “What do I do next?”

It’s a sequence of moves that keeps you from getting manipulated by speed, emotion, and design cues. 

Lateral reading answers “How do I investigate?”

It’s a method—opening new tabs, checking independent sources, verifying reputation, and corroborating claims. 

Stanford’s research found that fact-checkers “read laterally,” while novices read vertically (staying on-page), making them vulnerable to polished layouts and official-looking signals. 

4) What it looks like when you combine them (real workflow)

Here’s how SIFT + lateral reading runs in the real world:

·         Stop: “This headline makes me furious—pause.”

·         Investigate (lateral read): Open 2–3 tabs:

·       Search the outlet/author

·       Check what reputable sources say about them

·         Find better coverage (lateral read the claim):

·       Search the core claim

·       Look for independent confirmation

·         Trace:

·       Locate the original report/doc/video and read it in context

Result: You’re no longer judging credibility by appearance—you’re judging it by reputation + corroboration + original evidence.