Define the exact claim
We separate verifiable factual statements from opinion, prediction, satire and general criticism.
PUBLIC METHODOLOGY
Evidence first. Response accountable.
Detection surfaces a signal. Reconstruction tests the timeline. Preservation keeps the record. Human review determines whether and how a responsible response should proceed.
Locate primary evidence
Official records, original documents, direct statements and contemporaneous material receive priority.
Reconstruct the timeline
Publication dates, edits, syndication paths and archived versions establish how the narrative changed.
Seek relevant response
Where appropriate, the subject or publisher is contacted before a high-impact verdict is finalized.
Review competing evidence
Contradictory sources, uncertainty and missing context are disclosed rather than hidden.
Publish with accountability
A named reviewer, evidence summary, methodology and correction history accompany public findings.
VERDICT LANGUAGE
We avoid forcing every claim into “true” or “false.”
Reliable evidence supports the central factual claim.
The central claim is supported but some details need qualification.
Some facts may be correct, but framing or omitted context changes the meaning.
Available evidence does not establish the claim.
Strong reviewed evidence contradicts the central factual claim.
No responsible conclusion can currently be reached.
CORRECTIONS
New evidence can change a verdict.
Every material update should be timestamped. Original conclusions, changed evidence and the reason for revision remain visible in the case history.