Errors happen even with careful editorial process, and how a publication handles them matters as much as trying to avoid them in the first place. This page explains how Inference corrects published content.

How to report a suspected error

If you believe something we've published contains a factual error, reach out via our Contact page with the article URL, the specific claim you believe is incorrect, and, where possible, a source supporting the correction. We review every correction request submitted this way.

Our correction standards

Minor corrections (typos, formatting errors, broken links, and similar non-substantive issues) are fixed without a formal correction notice, since they don't affect the accuracy or meaning of the content.

Substantive corrections (errors that affect a factual claim, a quote, a statistic, or the overall accuracy of a piece) are handled differently. When we make a substantive correction, we:

Fix the error in the article text itself.

2. Add a visible correction notice at the top or bottom of the article (visible on the page, not hidden), stating what was changed and when. 3. Update the article's "last modified" date, which is separate from its original publish date and visible in the article byline and in our structured data. Consistent with our Editorial Standards commitment to visible publish and update dates on every article.

We do not silently edit substantive claims in published articles without a visible correction notice. We believe silent corrections erode exactly the kind of trust a publication needs to be useful, and we'd rather be visibly accountable for having made a mistake than appear to have never made one.

Corrections to illustrative or sample content

Content explicitly labeled as illustrative or sample (see our Editorial Standards for how and why we use that label) is not "corrected" in the same sense as a factual reporting error, since it isn't presented as verified reporting in the first place. If illustrative content is unclear, mislabeled, or could reasonably be mistaken for real reporting, we treat that as an issue worth fixing directly and promptly, since clear labeling is central to how we maintain reader trust.

Retraction

In the rare case that an entire piece is found to be based on a fundamentally flawed premise or source, rather than needing a correction to a specific claim, we retract it. Replacing the content with a clear notice explaining why the piece was removed, rather than deleting it without explanation.

Timeliness

We aim to review and act on correction requests promptly. For time-sensitive factual errors (particularly anything that could cause real confusion or harm if left uncorrected) we prioritize a fast turnaround over a fully deliberated review process, and follow up with a more complete correction if needed after initial action.