Editorial Standards & Corrections

Accuracy before certainty

We make clear what is verified, what parties claim, what evidence shows, what we infer and what remains unknown. Suspicion and industry gossip are not facts. Meaningful adverse claims receive a fair opportunity for response before publication.

Evidence and provenance

We prioritise primary documents, firsthand accounts and contemporaneous sources. Where lawful, safe and useful, reporting shows readers how a claim was established. Screenshots, exact wording, dates and source provenance are preserved when public records may change.

Public interest, not outrage

Reporting should reveal, test or explain something that matters. We avoid personality-driven attacks and sensational legal conclusions. Terms such as fraud or scam require evidence, context and appropriate legal review.

Corrections, clarifications and updates

Substantive corrections are attached to the affected work with the date, the original issue, what changed and why. Clarifications explain an ambiguity without disguising it as a routine update. Developing stories carry accurate modified times; timestamps are never refreshed merely to make old work look new.

To flag an error, use the dedicated correction pathway. We assess the evidence, contact relevant contributors when needed and update the public record transparently.

Community contributions

Tips, documents and firsthand accounts can begin reporting. They are independently checked before publication. We do not invite harassment, publish untested accusations, or treat volume of claims as proof.