Because publishing here is automated and hourly, most errors are caught after the fact — here's exactly how we handle that when it happens.
Last updated: September 2026.
As explained in our Editorial Policy, articles publish without a human editor reviewing each one individually before it goes live — so corrections here happen reactively, once a reader flags something. When we confirm a factual error — a wrong figure, a misidentified person or company, an outdated claim, or a "Likely Viewpoints" passage that reads as an actual quotation rather than illustrative framing — we edit the article directly to fix it. Minor issues like typos or formatting are fixed the same way, without any separate process.
Because our articles are static pages rather than a versioned CMS, we don't currently attach a dated "Correction (Month Day, Year):" note to every edit the way a traditional newsroom might. What we do instead: fix the content itself promptly, and if you reported the issue, reply to let you know it's been handled. If we ever build a visible correction-log feature, this page will be the first to say so.
If a story turns out to be based on a topic that was misread entirely, or contains an error serious enough that editing it wouldn't be honest, we remove or substantially rewrite the piece rather than leave a misleading version live. We don't do this to quietly avoid a bad review — see our Editorial Policy for how the pipeline works and where its limits are.
A request to remove a true, accurately reported story because someone would simply prefer it not exist isn't a correction, and we won't treat it as one. We correct factual errors — we don't retract accurate coverage on request.
Use our Contact page and include:
Every report goes directly to the editor — there's no support queue in between. We aim to review and act on reports within a few days; higher-impact errors (something factually harmful or defamatory) get looked at sooner.