Module: Validation/CrossReferenceTracking

INTELLIGENCE OPERATIVE PERSPECTIVE

This module enforces data-driven journalism standards by validating that news articles cite multiple parliamentary sources. Operating as a quality gate in the editorial pipeline, it ensures every article rests on verified intelligence from the riksdag-regering MCP platform - critical for avoiding intelligence assessment traps like single-source bias or uncorroborated claims.

VALIDATION FRAMEWORK: Cross-reference validation is structured around article types, each with specific parliamentary information requirements:

• Week-Ahead Articles (Prospective Analysis) Required sources: Calendar events, document registry, written questions, interpellations Intelligence value: Forward-looking agenda analysis, upcoming debate topics

• Committee Reports (Organizational Intelligence) Required sources: Committee decisions, voting patterns, speeches, propositions Intelligence value: Committee composition, policy prioritization, consensus-building

• Opposition Motions (Political Positioning) Required sources: Motion registry, full-text search, department analysis, debate Intelligence value: Opposition priorities, policy alternatives, party differentiation

• Government Propositions (Executive Intent) Required sources: Government proposals, policy analysis, speeches, debate Intelligence value: Government legislative agenda, policy direction, timing

• Breaking News (Event-Driven Intelligence) Required sources: Voting records, voting groups, speeches, member data Intelligence value: Real-time political developments, coalition behavior, crisis response

INTELLIGENCE APPLICATIONS:

1. Source Diversity: Minimum 3+ independent sources prevents narrative manipulation
2. Triangulation: Cross-referencing same event from multiple perspectives reduces bias
3. Chain of Custody: MCP tool citations create audit trail for claims
4. Analytical Integrity: Enforces structured analysis vs. opinion/speculation
5. Misinformation Prevention: Source requirements prevent false claims from publication

OPERATIONAL WORKFLOW:

1. Parse article content for MCP tool citations
2. Extract referenced document IDs and entity identifiers
3. Validate required tool coverage for article type
4. Confirm minimum source count (3+) for triangulation
5. Generate compliance report with source breakdown
6. Block publication if validation fails

SOURCE VERIFICATION LOGIC:

• Distinct tools = distinct sources (prevents single-query inflation)
• Tool parameters tracked for source diversity within category
• Cross-referenced entities (motions + voting patterns) count as compound sources
• Temporal diversity considered (older sources cross-reference recent)

COMPLIANCE STANDARDS:

• Editorial Standard: Minimum 3 independent sources per article
• Intelligence Standard: All major claims backed by at least 1 MCP tool call
• Transparency Standard: Source citations visible in article metadata
• Audit Standard: Complete call logs retained for 180 days

RISK MITIGATION:

• Prevents publication of unsourced allegations
• Detects coordination of coverage through shared sources
• Alerts editorial team to unusual source clustering
• Tracks source reliability across time

GDPR CONSIDERATIONS:

• All member references traced to source tool calls
• Personal data citations logged separately
• Member consent tracking integrated with source validation
• Data minimization enforced through source requirements