Fact Checking Policy

At FirstSportz, accuracy and reliability are fundamental to our journalism. We recognize that the trust of our readers depends on our ability to report information responsibly, verify important claims, and correct errors when they occur.

We strive to ensure that the information we publish is accurate, fairly presented, and supported by credible evidence available at the time of publication. Accuracy takes priority over speed, and we do not knowingly present speculation, rumor, or unverified claims as established fact.

This Fact-Checking Policy outlines the principles and procedures that guide our verification process across our website, social media platforms, and other published content.

Our Commitment to Accuracy

Our writers and editors are expected to exercise appropriate care in researching, reporting, writing, and reviewing content.

The level and nature of verification may vary depending on factors such as:

• The nature and sensitivity of the story.
• The potential impact of inaccurate information.
• The availability and reliability of primary or authoritative sources.
• Whether a claim is disputed, controversial, or based on anonymous information.
• The urgency and developing nature of the news.

Different types of stories may require different levels of verification. A report based on an official league announcement, for example, may rely primarily on that authoritative source, while a report involving an allegation, disputed claim, or sensitive matter may require additional corroboration and editorial review.

Research and Source Verification

Writers are expected to conduct appropriate research before publication and rely on credible, relevant, and reliable sources.

Where possible and appropriate, we prioritize:

• Primary sources.
• Official statements and records.
• Direct interviews and firsthand accounts.
• League, team, organizational, or government announcements.
• Reputable documentation, databases, and statistical sources.
• Credible reporting from established and reliable news organizations.

Information obtained from secondary sources should be evaluated carefully, particularly when the original source or evidence can reasonably be reviewed directly.

We do not assume that information is accurate solely because it has been widely shared online or reported by another publication.

Corroboration of Information

We seek corroboration from multiple reliable and independent sources when the nature, sensitivity, or significance of a claim warrants additional verification.

However, we do not apply an inflexible requirement that every fact must always be confirmed by two or more sources.

Information from a single authoritative or primary source may be used when appropriate, provided that the source is reliable and the information can reasonably be verified.

Claims based on anonymous sources, disputed information, allegations, or information with a significant potential impact may require additional corroboration and editorial scrutiny before publication.

If important information cannot be sufficiently verified, we may delay publication, attribute the information clearly, explain relevant uncertainty, or decide not to publish it.

Verification of Quotes, Names, Dates, and Statistics

Writers and editors are expected to take reasonable steps to verify important factual details, including:

• Names and identities.
• Dates and timelines.
• Scores, statistics, and records.
• Direct quotations.
• Titles, roles, and affiliations.
• Financial figures and other numerical information.
• Claims presented as factual statements.

Quotes should be represented accurately and in appropriate context. Material changes to the meaning of a quotation through selective editing, misleading presentation, or omission of essential context should be avoided.

Where data, surveys, or statistical claims are central to a story, we aim to identify the relevant source and provide sufficient context to help readers understand the information.

Where material limitations, uncertainties, or inconsistencies in data are relevant to the interpretation of a story, we aim to communicate them appropriately.

Handling Allegations and Disputed Claims

Allegations, accusations, and disputed claims require additional care.

We aim to distinguish clearly between verified facts, allegations, opinions, speculation, and claims made by individuals or organizations.

Where reasonably possible and appropriate, we seek comment or a response from individuals or organizations that are the subject of significant allegations or potentially damaging claims.

If a relevant party does not respond before publication, we may note that we sought a response where doing so provides important context to readers.

The absence of a response does not, by itself, confirm or validate a claim.

We do not treat rumors, conjecture, or unverified social media claims as established facts.

Anonymous and Confidential Sources

We prefer to use named, on-the-record sources whenever reasonably possible.

Anonymous or confidential sources may be used when there is a legitimate editorial reason to protect the identity of a source and when the information is considered sufficiently important and credible.

Before relying on anonymous information, we consider factors including:

• The source’s direct knowledge of the information.
• The source’s credibility and track record.
• The source’s possible motivations or conflicts of interest.
• Whether the information can be independently corroborated.
• Whether the information is available through an identifiable source or other evidence.

The identity of an anonymous source should generally be known to the responsible reporter and an appropriate editor, unless exceptional circumstances make this impossible.

When anonymous information is used, we aim to provide readers with as much relevant context as reasonably possible about why the source is credible and why anonymity was granted without compromising the source’s identity or safety.

Anonymous sourcing should not be used simply to publish speculation, personal attacks, or unsupported opinions.

On-the-Record, Background, and Off-the-Record Information

Writers should establish the terms of an interview or conversation with a source as clearly as possible.

Where terms such as on the record, on background, or off the record are used, the expectations regarding how the information may be used should be understood by both the journalist and the source before the information is relied upon for publication.

Information provided off the record will not be published as attributed information from that source. However, journalists may independently pursue and verify information through other sources where appropriate.

Social Media and Digital Content

Information found on social media platforms, forums, videos, screenshots, or other digital sources should not automatically be treated as authentic or accurate.

Where relevant, we may take reasonable steps to verify:

• The original source of the content.
• The identity of the person or account involved.
• The date and context of the material.
• Whether images, videos, or screenshots have been altered, manipulated, or presented misleadingly.
• Whether a claim can be independently confirmed through reliable evidence.

Social media posts may be reported when they are themselves relevant or newsworthy, but the existence of a post does not necessarily establish that the underlying claim is true.

Editorial Review

Fact-checking is a shared responsibility involving writers, editors, and other designated reviewers.

The writer has primary responsibility for ensuring that information submitted for publication is accurately reported and appropriately sourced.

Content is reviewed in accordance with our editorial workflow before publication. The level of editorial review may vary depending on factors such as the complexity, sensitivity, potential impact, and urgency of the story.

Additional review or senior editorial oversight may be required for particularly sensitive, controversial, or high-impact reports.

Corrections and Updates

Despite our efforts, errors can occur.

When credible evidence indicates that published information is inaccurate, we review the matter and take appropriate editorial action. Depending on the nature and significance of the issue, this may include a correction, clarification, update, or editor’s note.

We aim to correct significant factual errors promptly and transparently.

Our procedures for handling errors and corrections are explained in our Corrections Policy.

Reader Feedback and Reporting Errors

We encourage readers to notify us if they believe that information published by FirstSportz is inaccurate or misleading.

Readers may report potential errors through the Suggest a Correction option available on relevant content or by contacting our editorial team at:

[email protected]

When submitting a correction request, readers are encouraged to provide the relevant article or content, a description of the potential error, and any supporting information or evidence.

All credible correction requests are reviewed in accordance with our editorial and corrections procedures.

Continuous Review

Fact-checking standards must evolve alongside journalism, technology, and the ways information is created and distributed.

We periodically review our editorial practices and may update this Fact-Checking Policy to reflect changes in our procedures, evolving industry standards, and the broader media landscape.

Our goal is not to claim that errors are impossible. Our goal is to minimize them through responsible reporting and verification and to address them transparently when they occur.