It is better to drop a true story than to publish a false or inflated one.
Before anything publishes, a verification step reads the reporting and does five things:
We drop rather than soften. An unverifiable claim is rejected, not made vague.
Every draft is then attacked by a second, independent step that assumes the piece is flawed until proven otherwise. It checks for overclaiming ("cures" where the evidence says "reduced symptoms in a trial"), for figures or details the sources don't support, for missing caveats, and for hype or saccharine tone. It also enforces what counts as constructive at all: a real delivered result, or a genuinely significant, novel step. Plans, pledges, me-too product variants, and legal maneuvers that deliver nothing get dropped.
A false story that ships is worse than a true story dropped.
A story from a single outlet that clears both the verification gate and the critic still publishes — but it is flagged 1 SOURCE · UNCORROBORATED and ranked lower. When two or more independent outlets corroborate the same development, it earns the VERIFIED · N SOURCES mark and a ranking boost. We'd rather show you that distinction than hide it.
The confidence label on each story maps to its underlying score:
We show the band and the raw number, never a percentage — the figure is a judgment, not a measurement, and we don't want to dress it up as more precise than it is.
No ranking by views. No eligibility earned from votes or tone. Positive substance, never positive mood.
Automated checks are not infallible, and a human spot-audits what we publish. When a published story turns out to be wrong, we correct it and log the change in the open — see the corrections log. Spotted something off? Tell us.
VERIFIED AGAINST INDEPENDENT SOURCES
← All news