Forkast commits to correcting errors promptly, transparently, and with clear attribution. We do not quietly alter published content.
Our Commitment
Accuracy is a core editorial value. When we publish something that is factually incorrect, materially misleading, or improperly sourced, we correct it. We do not treat corrections as failures — we treat them as evidence that our accountability systems work.
What Constitutes a Correction
A correction is required when published content contains:
- Factual errors: Incorrect dates, figures, names, titles, or verifiable claims
- Misleading framing: A presentation of facts that, while individually accurate, creates a materially misleading impression
- Sourcing errors: Claims attributed to the wrong source, or unsourced claims presented as sourced
- Category or attribution errors: Story published under the wrong author or category
- Unqualified claims: Allegations, projections, or unverified information published without proper qualification
What Does Not Require a Correction
- Minor stylistic or formatting changes that do not alter meaning
- Updates to reflect new developments (these are handled as follow-on coverage, not corrections)
- Clarifications that add context without altering the original claim
- Editorial judgments that a reader disagrees with (opinion on analysis quality is not a factual error)
Correction Process
Identification
Errors may be identified by:
- Our editorial team during post-publication review
- Sources or subjects of coverage
- Readers via our editorial contact address
- Our managing editor during operational review
Verification
When a potential error is flagged, the editor-mind verifies:
- Whether the claim is factually incorrect (vs. a matter of interpretation)
- Whether the error is material (vs. trivial)
- What the correct information is and whether it can be sourced
- Whether the error affects the story’s overall conclusions
Correction Types
Immediate correction: For clear factual errors (wrong date, wrong number, wrong name), the published content is updated and a correction notice is appended to the article.
Editor’s note: For errors that affect framing, interpretation, or sourcing, an editor’s note is added at the top of the article explaining what was incorrect and what has been changed.
Retraction: In rare cases where the foundational premise of a story is proven incorrect, the story may be retracted. Retracted stories are not removed but are clearly marked as retracted with an explanation.
Timeframes
We aim to correct errors within the following timeframes:
- Within 2 hours: Clear factual errors identified by the editorial team or flagged by sources
- Within 6 hours: Errors requiring additional verification or source confirmation
- Within 24 hours: Complex errors requiring investigation or multi-source verification
These are targets, not guarantees. Complex corrections may take longer if verification requires external confirmation. Speed never overrides accuracy — we do not correct an error with another error.
Correction Notation
In-Article Notation
All corrections are noted within the article itself:
- Minor corrections (typos, formatting, non-material factual fixes): Noted with a timestamp at the end of the article: "[Corrected Jul 25, 2026 at 14:30 UTC: Original text stated X. Corrected to Y.]"
- Material corrections (errors affecting interpretation or key claims): Noted with an editor’s note at the top of the article, with the original text preserved and the correction explained
- Retractions: Full retraction notice at the top of the article, with explanation of what was incorrect and why the retraction was necessary
Transparency Standard
We do not:
- Silently alter published text without disclosure
- Remove corrected text without preserving the original
- Correct errors without explaining what was wrong
- Delay corrections to avoid accountability
Escalation
If a correction involves:
- A factual error in a story that has been widely shared or cited
- An error that affects the reputation of a named individual or entity
- A sourcing error that undermines the credibility of the story’s foundation
The editor-mind escalates to the managing editor (Joseph) for review and coordinates a response that may include direct outreach to affected parties.
Reader Corrections
Readers may submit correction requests via corrections@forkast.news. All correction requests are reviewed by the editor-mind. We respond to correction requests within 24 hours, even if the investigation takes longer.
We evaluate all correction requests on their merits, regardless of the source. A correction request from a subject of coverage receives the same standard of review as one from a reader with no connection to the story.
Repeat Errors
Patterns of recurring errors — in a beat, by an author, or in a coverage area — trigger a process review. The editor-mind identifies the pattern, determines the root cause, and implements corrective measures. These may include additional verification steps, revised sourcing protocols, or revised beat assignments.
Accountability
Corrections are a matter of public record. We do not hide them. The existence of a correction reflects our commitment to accuracy, not a failure of process. A newsroom that never corrects itself is either perfect or not paying attention.