The same standard the Hive’s case files use: public records only, linked where they’re used, and nothing about a named person that a record doesn’t support.
IN PLAIN WORDSWe leave opinions alone. We check facts. Confirmed facts get a link. Facts about a person or group that we can’t confirm go back to the writer or come out. Every piece lists how many facts were checked and how many came out.
| What the piece says | Example | What we do |
|---|---|---|
| Opinion | “The council should have waited for public input.” | Left as written. The label on every piece says the views are the writer’s. |
| A fact we can confirm | “The commission approved it 2–1.” | Kept, with a link to the record. |
| An unconfirmed fact about a named person or group | “The developer paid the commissioner.” | Sent back for a source, or removed. Never published with a “couldn’t find it” note. |
| An unconfirmed observation that isn’t about anyone’s conduct | “Traffic on my street has doubled.” | Kept only if framed as the writer’s own observation (“I’ve seen…”); otherwise removed. |
| A fact the records contradict | A wrong vote count or date | Sent back to fix. If it isn’t fixed, the piece doesn’t run. |
We don’t file records requests to check a piece; if the record isn’t already public, the statement is treated as unconfirmed.
If a published piece turns out to contain an error, it’s corrected in place, the updated date changes, and the change log says what changed and when. Nothing is quietly edited.