Magatech would like to let you know about the care and caution we take to ensure the accuracy of Our material, as outlined in Our Fact-Checking Policy.
Due accuracy in all Our content
The most critical feature of any journalistic platform is audience trust. Accurate, fair, and balanced reporting is essential for gaining and maintaining trust. It is critical that We resume to strive for as much accuracy as possible in all of Our information.
‘Due accuracy,’ in our opinion, means accuracy that is not only of the required quality, but also satisfactory in essence.
In the quest of proper accuracy, We take into account factors such as the subject and type of the information being delivered, the audience’s expectations, and so on.
In every news report, we attempt to provide the most accurate account possible, which is backed up by direct stakeholders.
We look into assertions with scepticism, examine assumptions, and query the status quo. We recognise that, despite our best efforts, areas of uncertainty will always remain. The level of rigour required to fact-check information in soft and hard stories, on the other hand, varies. Sources for a positive piece about an NGO’s work, for example, would be different than sources for an investigative story.
To ensure due correctness in Our content, we follow the guidelines listed below:
We make certain that any details we broadcast comes from a trustworthy source and is supported by clear and verifiable facts.
We are required to attribute stories to the platform from where they were sourced if direct sources are not available. We make every effort to verify any claims, allegations, or information ascribed to official authorities or from someone we believe has a reason for acting in a way that goes beyond just recounting the facts of the incident. As a result, we qualify and bring attention to any material, such as claims or allegations, that we are unable to verify. We are confident in the precision of the information we provide.
If the contrary is verified, we modify the news item/information as soon as practically possible and guarantee that We properly notify Our readers of the changes. We recognise how crucial it is for our audiences to have faith in us.
As a result, it is Our goal to not intentionally misinform someone, to not edit material, and to not provide made-up content as genuine content.
Furthermore, when severe factual errors are discovered, we openly acknowledge them and guarantee that they are corrected in a clear and acceptable manner as soon as feasible. We make sure that the public has a fair chance to report any inconsistencies or errors on Our Website by including a “Suggest A Correction” portion at the end of every report we provide and publish.
Our journalists’ primary responsibilities include reporting, writing, and fact-checking news/information/stories.
Indeed, Our stories are scrutinised on numerous levels, including a thorough fact-checking internal procedure in which each piece is submitted to a thorough due diligence process before being examined by one or more of Our editors.
It is important to note that the seniority of editors who assess stories before they are published on the Website varies and is dependent on a variety of circumstances, including the issue’s complexity and sensitivity, as well as the pressure of time.
We make every effort to contact all persons involved if an allegation is made. Then, in order to get the most accurate result, we independently validate the information in question and the one being provided.
Sourcing Information for Our content
Following the following standards, we gather information in the most precise manner possible: At least two sources should be used to verify each piece of data. When a single source is used, the source’s credibility is established by corroboration of what the person is stating. Instead than depending entirely on a human source, look for documentary evidence in every circumstance achievable. If a survey is completed, it is Our commitment to explain how the data was gathered and interpreted.
If our data does not lead to accurate information, we notify the audience as soon as possible.
The goal and intention is to obtain accurate information in the first instance, rather than making it public first and then addressing any remaining doubts. Always make an effort to record and interview information/news stakeholders. Explain why, counting on the possibilities, an anonymous source is not named, and devise a method for providing as much information about such sources as possible so that readers can assess their reliability. Share source details with our editors so that they (editors and reporters) can determine whether or not the information in question is appropriate for use and in what manner. Anonymized quotations must reflect the conversation between the journalist and the editor.
Have brief discussions with authorities on how to use the information they’ve provided, especially if they’ve never worked with the media before. Clarify a source’s expectations for information being kept “off the record,” “on background,” or other statuses, as these terms can mean various things to different people. Give people the opportunity to comment to stories that might paint them in a poor light, and explain to readers what we do to get responses when sources don’t. Seek out sources with limited access to public platforms, as well as those who are prominent and powerful.
In order to bypass any false report being delivered to the audience, a senior resource or the person in charge of the newsroom at The Logical Indian should always be approached if one is in a quandary or unable to make a choice on their own.
User-generated content reaches with its own set of problems. We do not presume that the material supplied with Us is authentic, and we take reasonable steps 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 account rather than a disinterested onlooker.
We make certain that user-generated content is labelled as such. Furthermore, we adhere to the following guidelines:
On the internet, sources of information that appear to be reliable are not necessarily correct. It may be essential to prove who runs the website and/or validate that the material relevant to them is real with an individual or organisation.
It’s important to discern between fact and rumour. This is especially true, but not only, for material available on social media, where distortions may be intentional and unintentional, but where an error or rumour can spread like wildfire among an audience around the world in minutes, while corrections are much more difficult to achieve the same momentum. When content from a social media site or another internet source is utilised to corroborate a fact, extra investigation may be required. All cloth that was not collected by Us is qualified and called out.