Duniyakamood (“We” / “Us” / “Our”) would like to educate you about the care and caution that We take to guarantee that Our information is accurate, as outlined in Our Fact-Checking Policy.
All of our stuff is accurate.
The most vital feature of every journalistic platform is the audience’s confidence. Accurate, fair, and balanced reporting is the only way to acquire and maintain trust. It is critical that We continue to work hard to ensure that all of Our material is as accurate as possible. ‘Due accuracy,’ in our opinion, is accuracy that is not just of the required quality but also acceptable in essence. In the quest of proper accuracy, We evaluate factors such as the topic and type of the information being presented, the audience’s expectations, and so on. In every news storey, we attempt to provide the most accurate account, which is backed up by the news’s direct stakeholders. We look at assertions with scepticism, examine assumptions, and put common knowledge to the test. We understand that there will always be areas of doubt, despite our best attempts to address them. The level of rigour necessary to fact-check material on soft and hard stories, however, differs. Those needed for a favourable report on an NGO’s work, for example, might vary from sources needed for an investigative piece.
To guarantee that our material is accurate, we follow the guidelines outlined below:
We make certain that any information we broadcast comes from a reputable source and is supported by real and verifiable facts. We are required to credit articles to the platform from where they were obtained if we do not have direct sources.
We make every effort to verify any claims, accusations, or information ascribed to governmental officials or from someone we suspect has a motive other than just recounting the facts of the occurrence. As a result, we qualify and highlight any material, such as claims or accusations, that we are unable to verify.
We stand by the information we provide and believe it to be correct. If the contrary is verified, we modify the news item/information as soon as practically practicable and guarantee that We properly tell Our viewers about the changes.
We recognise how important it is for our viewers to have faith in us. As a result, it is Our goal to not intentionally misinform anybody, to not edit any material, and to not publish any made-up information as genuine stuff. Furthermore, when severe factual mistakes are discovered, we openly acknowledge them and guarantee that they are corrected in a clear and acceptable way as soon as feasible.
We make sure that the audience has a fair chance to report any mistakes or errors on Our Website by including a “Suggest A Correction” section at the conclusion of every of Our reporting that is presented and published on Our Website.
Our journalists’ primary role is to report, write, and fact-check news/information/stories. In truth, Our articles are scrutinised on numerous levels, including a comprehensive fact-checking internal system in which each item is subjected to a complete due diligence and then evaluated by one or more of Our editors. It is important to note that the seniority of editors who assess articles before they are published on the Website varies and is dependent on a variety of circumstances, including the complexity and sensitivity of the topic, as well as the pressure of time.
In the event of a complaint, we make every effort to contact all parties involved. Then, in order to reach the most accurate result, we independently check the information in question and the one being supplied.
Information for our articles is gathered from a variety of sources.
We gather data in the most accurate manner possible by following the following guidelines:
At least two sources should be used to verify each piece of information.
In the event of a single source, the source’s credibility is established through corroboration with what the person is stating.
Instead than depending exclusively on a human source, look for documented proof wherever feasible.
If a survey is conducted, it is Our responsibility to explain how the data was obtained and analysed. If there is a danger that Our data will not lead to correct information, we will notify the public as soon as feasible.
The goal and intention is to get correct information in the first instance, rather than making it public first and then resolving any concerns that may arise.
Always make an attempt to interview and document stakeholders of the information/news. Explain why, depending on the circumstances, an anonymous source is not identified, and provide a method for providing readers with as much information as possible about such sources so that they may judge the sources’ credibility.
Share source information with others. Our editors so that they (editors and reporters) can determine if the material in question is acceptable for use and how it should be utilised. Anonymous quotes must represent the discussion between the reporter and the editor.
Have brief discussions with sources on how to utilise the material they’ve provided, particularly if they don’t have much experience dealing with the media. Because such terminology might have varied meanings for different persons, clarify a source’s expectations of keeping material “off the record,” “on background,” and/or other statuses.
Give individuals the right to comment to stories that may paint them in a poor light, and explain to readers how hard we try to get sources to respond when they don’t.
Seek for sources that don’t have much access to a broad range of public platforms, as well as those who are important and powerful.
In order to prevent any incorrect information being delivered to the public, a senior resource or the person in charge of the newsroom at The Logical Indian may always be contacted if one is in a quandary or unable to make a choice on their own.
User-Generated Content (UGC) is a kind of user-generated content
User-generated material comes with its own set of problems. We do not presume that the information supplied with Us is authentic, and we take reasonable efforts to verify the accuracy of such content, depending on how We intend to utilise it. We are aware of how to use information provided by a lobbyist or someone with a vested interest in the narrative rather than a neutral onlooker. We make certain that user-generated material is labelled as such.