At CredoraPress, we believe readers deserve information they can understand, evaluate, and trust.

Technology changes quickly. A statistic can become outdated, a product feature can change, and information circulating online is not always accurate. That is why Fact-Checking Policy is an important part of how we approach publishing.

Our goal is not to claim that every article will be perfect. Our goal is to take reasonable steps to verify important information before publication and correct meaningful errors when they are discovered.

Our Fact-Checking Policy

Our Fact-Checking Policy applies to factual information published across CredoraPress, including articles, guides, reviews, comparisons, research-based content, and other editorial material where factual accuracy matters.

The level of checking may vary depending on the subject and the type of claim being made.

Information involving statistics, research findings, product specifications, pricing, technical details, regulations, company announcements, and other potentially changeable facts receives particular attention.

How We Check Information

Fact-checking starts with the source.

When practical, our writers look for the most reliable source available rather than relying solely on information repeated by other websites.

Depending on the topic, this may include:

• Official company documentation
• Government websites
• Academic research
• Research institutions
• Industry reports
• Original datasets
• Product documentation
• Statements from relevant organizations
• Reputable news and technology publications

For example, when discussing a software feature, official product documentation may be more useful than an unrelated third-party article.

When discussing research, we may look for the original study or research organization rather than relying only on a summary.

Evaluating Sources

Not every source carries the same level of authority.

When reviewing information, we consider factors such as:

Source quality: Who published the information?

Originality: Is this the original source or a copy of information published elsewhere?

Relevance: Does the source actually support the claim being made?

Date: Is the information still current?

Context: Could the information be misleading when taken out of context?

Consistency: Can the claim be reasonably supported by another credible source?

These considerations help us avoid presenting weak or outdated information as established fact.

Checking Statistics & Data

When an article includes a statistic or research finding, we aim to identify where the figure came from and understand what it actually measures. Whenever possible, we prefer the original research or primary source rather than relying on secondary reporting.

When an article includes a statistic or research finding, we aim to identify where the figure came from and understand what it actually measures.

We pay attention to:

• The original source
• Publication date
• Sample size where relevant
• Methodology where available
• Geographic or industry limitations
• The period covered by the data
• Whether the statistic has been updated

We avoid presenting old statistics as current information without appropriate context.

Checking Technology Information

Our approach also emphasizes creating useful, people-first information rather than content produced solely for search engines. For additional guidance, see Google Search Central

A feature available today may be removed tomorrow. A product may change its pricing model, introduce new capabilities, or discontinue an existing service.

For this reason, technology-related claims should be checked against current and relevant sources whenever practical.

Where information is likely to change, readers should also consider the publication or update date of the article.

Fact-Checking Product Reviews

Product reviews require particular care because readers may use them when making purchasing decisions.

When reviewing a product or software platform, we aim to distinguish between:

• Facts provided by the company
• Information observed during evaluation
• Independent research
• Editorial analysis
• Personal experience

We do not treat marketing claims as automatically established facts.

Where appropriate, we may identify claims as coming from the company rather than presenting them as independently verified conclusions.

Handling Conflicting Information

Sometimes credible sources disagree.

When that happens, we do not simply choose the statement that sounds most convincing.

Instead, we consider the quality and relevance of the available evidence and, where appropriate, explain the uncertainty or disagreement to the reader.

A responsible article should acknowledge uncertainty when the available evidence does not support a definitive conclusion.

AI-Assisted Research & Fact-Checking

AI tools can help with research, organization, and identifying information that may require further investigation. However, AI-generated information is not treated as automatically factual. For additional guidance on managing risks associated with AI systems, see the NIST AI Risk Management Framework

However, AI-generated information is not treated as automatically factual.

AI systems can produce outdated, incomplete, or incorrect information. Therefore, important claims should be checked against reliable sources before being presented as facts.

Human judgment remains an important part of our fact-checking process.

Our broader approach to AI-assisted publishing is explained in the AI Usage Policy.

When We Cannot Verify a Claim

Sometimes there simply is not enough reliable evidence to verify a claim.

In those situations, we may:

• Remove the claim
• Rephrase it with appropriate context
• Identify it as an allegation or claim rather than an established fact
• Attribute the information to its source
• Explain the uncertainty

We would rather provide a careful answer than present speculation as certainty.

Corrections & Updates

Fact-checking does not end when an article is published.

Readers, authors, companies, researchers, and other knowledgeable sources may identify information that requires correction or clarification.

When we determine that a meaningful factual error exists, we aim to correct it.

Depending on the circumstances, we may also update the article to reflect newer information.

Our Corrections Policy explains how we handle significant factual errors and editorial corrections.

Reader Feedback

Our readers can play an important role in improving the accuracy of CredoraPress.

If you believe an article contains an inaccurate claim, outdated statistic, incorrect product detail, or unsupported statement, please contact us and identify the relevant section.

Useful feedback should include supporting information where possible so that our team can investigate the issue efficiently.

We review credible concerns and make changes when the evidence supports a correction.

Our Standard

No publication can promise that mistakes will never happen.

What we can promise is that accuracy matters to us.

Our Fact-Checking Policy is built around a straightforward principle:

Check important claims. Use credible sources. Provide context. Correct meaningful mistakes.

We want CredoraPress readers to have confidence that the information they encounter has been approached with care and responsibility.