Corrections Policy

TechnologyBlog.co.za aims to correct factual errors promptly and transparently.

Readers and organisations may report a possible error by emailing:

tech@technologyblog.co.za

A correction request should preferably include:

• The article title
• The article URL
• The statement believed to be incorrect
• The correct information
• Supporting evidence or a primary source

How corrections are handled

When a possible error is reported, Technology Blog will review the article and available evidence.

When a factual error is confirmed:

• The article will be corrected.
• The modification date may be updated.
• A correction note will be added when the change is material.
• The correction note will explain what was changed.

A correction does not automatically remove an article when the corrected article remains accurate and in the public interest.

Correction-note format

Correction — [DATE]: An earlier version of this article stated that [INCORRECT INFORMATION]. The article has been updated to reflect that [CORRECT INFORMATION].

Clarifications

A clarification may be added when an article is factually accurate but could create an unintended or unclear impression.

Clarification — [DATE]: This article has been updated to clarify that [CLARIFICATION].

Company responses

When an organisation provides a relevant response after publication, Technology Blog may update the article to include the response.

Adding a response does not necessarily mean that the original reporting was incorrect.

Article removals

Technology Blog will not normally remove an accurate article solely because it is unflattering or no longer preferred by a person or organisation mentioned in it.

Removal may be considered in exceptional circumstances involving:

• A serious legal issue
• Significant privacy or safety risks
• Materially false content that cannot be adequately corrected
• Content published in error
• A compelling ethical reason

Source Attribution Policy

Technology Blog should provide readers with enough information to understand where important claims originated.

Whenever practical:

• Link to the primary source.
• Name the organisation or person responsible for the information.
• Attribute original reporting to the publication that produced it.
• Distinguish official claims from independent findings.
• Avoid relying solely on summaries produced by other publications.
• Preserve links to material evidence when an article is updated.

A link should be placed close to the claim it supports.

Source attribution should help readers verify information. It should not be added merely for search-engine purposes.