StoryShift.uk is committed to accuracy, transparency and accountability in all editorial content published for our UK audience. This policy sets out the standards and procedures our team follows to verify claims before publication, to handle uncertainty responsibly, and to correct errors promptly when they occur. It applies to all editorial material, including news articles, analysis, features, opinion pieces and sponsored content that is clearly labelled as such.
What we verify before publication
We verify factual assertions that are central to the story and that, if wrong, would materially mislead a reader. This includes, but is not limited to:
- Statistical data, survey results and polling figures
- Claims about public policy, legislation, regulation and government decisions
- Health and medical claims, including clinical trial results and public health guidance
- Financial data, company performance, market movements and economic indicators
- Technology product specifications, cybersecurity incidents and digital platform policies
- Legal statements, court rulings, regulatory actions and case law references
- Attributions of quotations, statements and positions to named individuals or organisations
Our verification threshold is higher for claims that are controversial, disputed, or likely to have significant public impact. Where a claim cannot be verified to our satisfaction, we either attribute it clearly to a named source, add a caveat explaining the uncertainty, or omit it entirely.
Source hierarchy
We assess sources by reliability and relevance. Our preferred order, from most authoritative to least, is:
- Primary sources: official documents, raw datasets, court filings, parliamentary records, regulatory submissions
- Official records and public data: publications from the Office for National Statistics (ONS), gov.uk, Hansard, the UK Statistics Authority, the Bank of England, and similar bodies
- Expert commentary: named specialists with relevant credentials, institutional affiliation and no undisclosed conflicts of interest
- Clearly attributed secondary sources: media reports, academic papers, industry reports — always linked or cited so readers can check the original
We do not rely on anonymous sources for factual claims. Where anonymity is granted for legitimate reasons (e.g. whistleblowers), we corroborate the information from at least one other source before publication. A full list of our standards for sourcing is available on our Sources & Standards page.
Verification workflow
Each article follows a three-stage verification process:
- Writer: the journalist responsible for the piece sources all factual claims, checks primary materials where possible, and notes any uncertainties for review.
- Editor: the relevant section editor (e.g. Oliver Grant for UK news, Emily Carter for culture, James Whitmore for politics, Laura Bennett for technology) reviews the article for factual accuracy, source quality and internal consistency before publication.
- Standards desk: for sensitive content — including health, finance, legal claims, or any story likely to attract significant public or official scrutiny — Kristjan Sepp, our Standards & Fact-Checking Lead, performs additional checks. This may involve independent verification of documentary evidence, cross-checking against official databases, or consulting external experts.
Kristjan Sepp is reachable at factcheck@storyshift.uk for any queries regarding our verification processes.
Use of public datasets
We place particular reliance on UK public datasets as a baseline for statistical and policy claims. Our primary sources include:
- Office for National Statistics (ONS) – for economic, demographic and social data
- GOV.UK – for policy documents, consultation responses, press releases and ministerial statements
- UK Parliament – for Hansard records, committee reports, legislation and debates
- UK Supreme Court and judiciary websites – for judgments and case summaries
- Regulatory bodies such as Ofcom, the Competition and Markets Authority, the Financial Conduct Authority and the Information Commissioner’s Office
Where we use third-party analysis of such datasets, we verify that the underlying data are publicly accessible and that the interpretation is consistent with the original source.
Corrections when we get it wrong
If we publish a factual error, we correct it promptly and transparently. Our Corrections Policy sets out the specific procedures for acknowledging mistakes, updating articles, and noting corrections at the foot of the page. All substantive corrections are reviewed by Kristjan Sepp or the Editor-in-Chief, Maarika Tamm, and logged internally.
Errors that materially affect the meaning of an article will result in a correction notice. Minor typographical or formatting errors are corrected without a notice.
Reader reports
We encourage readers to notify us of potential inaccuracies. Reports should be sent to factcheck@storyshift.uk. We aim to acknowledge receipt within two working days and to investigate all reasonable concerns. Where a correction is warranted, we will apply it and inform the reporter.
Related policies
For more detail on our overall editorial approach, please see our Editorial Policy. Information about our editorial team, including the roles of Kristjan Sepp and other key staff, is on our Our Team page.