This page explains how Insight Britain checks facts before publication and how you can help us correct mistakes. If you spot an error, please contact our fact-checking team directly – we take every report seriously and will investigate promptly.
What does Insight Britain fact-check?
We verify every substantive factual claim in our articles – statistics, dates, names, quotations, policy details and data from primary or secondary sources. Our fact-checking process applies to all sections: news, explainers, business, health, technology, culture and lifestyle.
We maintain a Sources & Standards hierarchy that prioritises primary documents, official data, peer‑reviewed research and direct testimony over secondary or unattributed material. Where a claim cannot be verified to our satisfaction, we either remove it, label it as unverified, or clearly attribute it to a named source. Every article includes a link to our full source hierarchy at the bottom.
How do we handle rumours and unverified claims?
Rumours, speculation and unverified claims are never presented as established fact. Where we report a rumour because it is newsworthy and in the public interest, we clearly label it as such and explain why it remains unconfirmed. We do not amplify speculation without context.
Our editorial team uses a traffic‑light system: green for confirmed facts, amber for attributed claims awaiting verification, red for material we cannot verify and therefore do not publish. Only green and amber material may appear, and amber items are always accompanied by a clear explanation of their status. Readers can see this system referenced in the metadata of each article.
Who oversees the fact‑checking process?
Sofia Lindberg, our Standards & Fact‑Checking Lead, oversees the entire process – from source verification to final sign‑off. She personally reviews articles that make sensitive or high‑impact claims, such as those involving public health, criminal justice, national security or serious allegations against named individuals.
Sofia works with each editor and correspondent to ensure that source material is robust and that our internal checks are consistent. She also manages our corrections database and logs every reader report. You can see full details of all team members on Our Team page.
How can readers report a potential error?
We encourage readers to email factcheck@insightbritain.co.uk with the article URL, the specific claim you believe is incorrect, and any supporting evidence. Our fact‑checking team aims to acknowledge receipt within two working days and to resolve straightforward corrections within five working days.
All reports are logged, investigated by Sofia Lindberg or a nominated deputy, and the outcome is recorded. If we confirm an error, we issue a formal correction and update the article with a transparent note. For the full corrections process, please see our Corrections Policy.
How this works in practice
Suppose we publish an explainer on NHS waiting times that includes a statistic: “Average waiting time for elective surgery is 14.3 weeks.” Our researcher checks the official NHS England data, the publication date and the methodology. Sofia Lindberg reviews the source link and confirms it matches the claim. After publication, a reader emails factcheck@ pointing out that the figure applies only to England, not the whole UK. We verify the reader’s claim, correct the article to “England’s average waiting time…” and add a correction note at the top. The correction is logged, and the reader receives a reply explaining the change.
If the statistic had come from an unverified social‑media post, we would never have used it without a clear attribution and context. In that case, the article would have stated: “According to a Twitter thread from [source], waiting times are said to be 14.3 weeks – this figure has not been independently confirmed by Insight Britain.”
Who is responsible for this policy?
Insight Britain is owned and operated by Valletta Civic Media Ltd, a Malta‑registered digital media company. Editorial independence is guaranteed by the Editor‑in‑Chief, Edward Davies Bennett, who has final responsibility for all fact‑checking and correction processes. Neither the ownership nor any commercial partner can override our factual standards.
This policy is reviewed quarterly by Sofia Lindberg and Edward Davies Bennett. It forms part of our broader Editorial Policy, which covers sourcing, impartiality and conflicts of interest. All staff and freelancers are required to read and follow both policies.
In short
Everything we publish is carefully checked, and we welcome your help to keep us accurate. If you see something that looks wrong, tell us – we will fix it and explain what changed.