Correction Policy

Independent Space News treats correction work as part of reporting, not as an afterthought. Our standard is to correct the record quickly, clearly, proportionately, and permanently. This policy sits alongside our Editorial Standards & Ethics, and is informed by the same accountability principles used across professional journalism.

1. Core Standard

When we publish a factual error, we correct it as soon as it is verified.
We do not silently rewrite substantive errors in published reporting.
We distinguish between minor edits, clarifications, corrections, and full editor's notes.
We preserve trust by making significant changes visible to readers, not buried or obscured.

2. What We Correct

Incorrect names, titles, dates, locations, figures, technical details, quotations, or source attributions.
Errors in orbital, launch, finance, policy, scientific, or regulatory reporting.
Material omissions that leave the audience with a misleading understanding of the facts.
Visual, caption, chart, table, and metadata errors when they affect meaning or interpretation.

3. Correction Levels

Minor edit: grammar, spelling, formatting, or style fixes that do not change the factual meaning of the report.
Clarification: added wording that improves precision or context where the original wording was incomplete, ambiguous, or easy to misread.
Correction: a factual change to the published record, labeled clearly in the story.
Editor's note: used when the error is significant, the reporting process needs explanation, or the audience should understand how and why the record changed.
Retraction or removal: reserved for exceptional cases such as fabricated material, plagiarism, legal necessity, or a failure so severe that the original piece cannot stand.

4. How We Display Corrections

Substantive corrections are added to the article itself in plain language.
When practical, correction notes identify what was wrong and what has been fixed.
Major corrections and editor's notes are placed where readers can reasonably see them, typically near the top or bottom of the story record.
We do not frame corrections defensively or euphemistically. The purpose is to clarify the record, not protect our ego.

5. Speed and Verification

Credible correction requests are reviewed promptly.
Urgent factual errors affecting public understanding, safety, markets, reputations, or live events are prioritized.
We verify before correcting, but verification must not become an excuse for avoidable delay.
If a matter is under review and the risk of reader confusion is high, we may append a temporary note while verification is underway.

6. Scope Across Formats

This policy applies to articles, briefs, explainers, live updates, graphics, newsletters, and published data-driven analysis.
For evolving stories, we may update headlines, summaries, or timelines, but major factual shifts are still labeled.
If an error affects associated social or syndicated copy, we will update or annotate those channels when feasible.

7. Reader Requests and Challenges

We welcome evidence-based correction requests made in good faith.
Requests should identify the specific claim, the problem, and the best supporting evidence available.
Disagreement alone is not a correction, but factual challenges supported by records, documents, or direct evidence will be reviewed seriously.
Readers can send correction requests through the contact page.

8. Accountability Record

We treat correction work as a signal of editorial discipline, not embarrassment.
When our methods or assumptions were flawed, we aim to say so directly.
Patterns of error are reviewed internally to improve sourcing, editing, verification, and technical workflows.

This is a living policy. ISN may refine the operational details as the newsroom grows, but the governing rule will remain the same: when the record is wrong, fix it clearly and leave readers with a better record than the one they first saw.