Skip to main content
White document cards, a magnifier with a red handle and an open folder beside the Corrections and Right of Reply heading and David Medeiros original icon.
Identify the exact statement, compare its supporting source and preserve the correction history. Presentation illustration; preparing a request does not send it or guarantee a result.

Trust, fairness, and accountability

Corrections and Right of Reply Policy

This archive is committed to accuracy, context, fair documentation, source transparency, and a preserved audit trail. A correction request does not need legal language, and submitting one does not waive any right.

Last substantively reviewed: August 7, 2026

How to submit

Check the Contact page for the currently listed contact option. There is no online correction-submission form on this site. Preparing the template below does not send a request. Do not send private health information, Social Security numbers, account credentials, or unrelated personal identifiers.

Receipt will be acknowledged when practicable. Review time depends on the record, source availability, identity and privacy questions, and whether outside verification is required. The archive does not promise a result or a fixed deadline.

Right of reply

A person or organization named in a public record may provide a source-supported response, clarification, final disposition, or correction. When relevant and lawful to publish, the archive may link or reproduce the response with the original record so readers can evaluate both.

Publication of a response does not mean the archive endorses it, and publication of the original source does not mean the archive endorses every statement in that source.

Privacy and urgent safety concerns

Identify the exact URL and information at issue. Explain the safety, privacy, authentication, or legal concern and supply enough context to evaluate it without repeating sensitive material unnecessarily. Urgent review may temporarily restrict a display copy while preserving internal audit information.

Review standards

  • • The request is matched to the exact public URL, statement, source file, dataset row, or media record.
  • • The supporting material is checked against the published source and any final agency or court disposition supplied.
  • • Source text, archive summary, allegation, interpretation, opinion, and adjudicated finding remain clearly distinguished.
  • • Identity, privacy, authentication, redaction, and public-interest concerns are considered before changing or expanding a named-person record.
  • • Material changes identify what changed, when it changed, and why.

How to request a correction

  • • The page or record at issue
  • • The specific statement believed to be inaccurate
  • • The reason the statement is believed to be inaccurate
  • • The supporting source or record
  • • The requested correction

Possible review actions

  • • Correct a factual error
  • • Add context
  • • Add clarification
  • • Add a source note
  • • Add a redaction
  • • Mark a record as disputed
  • • Decline a correction when the existing record is accurate, supported, or protected opinion

Audit trail

Material corrections should not silently erase the historical record. The archive may preserve the original source, a corrected display copy, and a public note identifying what changed, the review date, supporting material, and the reason for the decision. Minor spelling, formatting, or broken-link repairs may be corrected without a separate substantive notice when they do not change meaning.

· DOWNLOAD DESCRIPTION CORRECTIONS

Download checksums and field guides now match the published files

Some descriptions retained measurements from an earlier build. The corrections below describe the files already available to readers. They do not add evidence, authenticate a source, or establish the truth of a claim.

Source comparison and citations

Before: The comparison and citation labels used measurements taken before the final public-file processing. After: All 16 CSV citations use the final published file identities. The recorded-source comparison shows 11 matching and five differing identities, rather than 16 matches. A difference identifies different bytes; it does not, by itself, explain the change or establish wrongdoing.

Read the source-to-download comparison

Collection download labels

The 16 public collection landing pages had 21 outdated CSV or JSON identities among their 32 download references. Their visible labels and associated Dataset download metadata now use the final files' byte sizes and SHA-256 values. The downloadable files themselves were not changed by this correction.

Browse the collection downloads

JSON field coverage and record totals

Guides on 47 existing Explore, Media and Verification pages now describe their final JSON downloads. The media guide previously showed 1,253 records; the published file contains 2,137. The forensic manifest guide previously showed 1,892; its published file contains 3,499. The discovery index remains at 1,729 records, with its checksum corrected. Field coverage counts and matching Dataset field descriptions were updated as needed.

These are counts of entries in particular files, not counts of verified findings, distinct people, or newly approved evidence. A present field may still be empty or null.

Discovery guide · Media guide · Manifest guide

Original evidence and existing archive access are preserved. The two flagged records' new pages remain withheld for human review, and Video #0 remains excluded. Technical verification does not replace that review or grant reuse rights.

Read the September 26 corrections · Prepare a source-supported correction request

This notice covers these three completed corrections, not the archive's entire revision history or search-engine indexing.

· DISPLAY AND METADATA UPDATE

Corrections to media notices and record presentation

These changes concern how the archive presents preserved material. They do not authenticate a source, establish an allegation, or replace human review.

OCR notices now describe the actual processing state

Before: Some generated media notices overstated the availability of extracted text. After: The affected notices state that OCR was not performed. An image is not a checked transcription. Readers should inspect the original and must not treat a processing label as evidence that its contents were verified.

See a corrected image notice

Record display separates technical fields from evidence

Unnecessary export-owner fields were removed from the generated public record presentation and its derived reading exports. Page-specific descriptions and access-page indexing controls were corrected. Original evidence and useful source-version files were retained. Two flagged records’ new pages remain withheld pending human review; this does not approve those records or remove their existing archive access.

See the record presentation and source access

Missing video dates are not invented

Video structured-data objects without a supported upload date were omitted from the affected Livewire pages. This is a metadata correction, not removal of the retained videos or captions. A record’s creation date is not a substitute for a video’s upload date. Video #0 remains excluded.

Browse the Livewire records

Read earlier dated corrections · Prepare a source-supported correction request

This is a bounded correction notice, not a complete revision history, a human-review sign-off, or a claim of search-engine indexing.

DATED DISPLAY AND METADATA CORRECTIONS

What changed, and why?

This is a bounded log of the corrections listed below—not a complete history of every source file or page. These are archive display and metadata corrections. Original source files were retained. Technical publication checks do not establish the truth of source allegations or replace human review.

Abbreviated hashes were incorrectly labeled verified

· Open the binder-index article

Before
Two source hash fragments ending in an ellipsis were displayed with “Verified.”
After
The two fragments are explicitly labeled “incomplete; not verified.” Their displayed fragment values remain available for comparison.
Reason and limit
An abbreviated value is not a complete SHA-256 digest and cannot support the claimed full-digest comparison. Even a complete matching digest identifies bytes; it does not establish authorship, authenticity, truth or chain of custody.
Preserved
The source CSV, video, captions, transcript and other article content. The same release repaired filename wrapping on small screens.

Publisher identity is not unconfirmed authorship

Before
Five Article metadata objects identified the archive publisher as the author even though imported authorship was unconfirmed. Another record tied a source-named team to the archive publisher’s identity.
After
The five unconfirmed author assertions were omitted. The archive remains identified as publisher, and the visible maintainer/attribution warning remains. “ABI Resources Team” retains the source-provided name without the unrelated archive identity link.
Reason and limit
Maintaining an archive is not evidence of authorship. This correction aligns metadata with available fields; it is not independent authentication of any author.
Show the six affected records

A source creation date is not a publication date

· Open the February 23 founder-analysis archive record

Before
The source creation timestamp was used as an Article publication date even though the source publication field was absent.
After
The visible date is labeled “Source record created.” Article publication-date metadata is omitted, and the selectable citation says “Article publication date: not recorded.”
Reason and limit
Creation, publication, modification and verification are different events. The archive does not invent a missing publication date.

Prepare a source-supported correction request · Compare recorded source and published-file digests

This log is not a correction intake service, a guarantee of response time, a legal finding or evidence of search-engine indexing.

PREPARE → CHECK → CONTACT

Prepare a clear correction request

You do not need legal language. Start with one public page and one statement so the issue can be located and compared with its source.

  1. Locate: copy the exact public page URL and the sentence, table row or media timestamp at issue.
  2. Explain: state what appears wrong or missing. Separate the source document's wording from the archive's summary.
  3. Support: identify a public source, page number or passage and explain the requested change. If a fact is unknown, say so.
  4. Protect: leave out private health information, account numbers, credentials and unrelated identifiers. For a privacy concern, identify the location without copying the sensitive material into the request.

This is an outline, not a submission form. Nothing is sent by selecting or copying it. This page does not collect a request, generate a receipt or guarantee a response. Keep your own copy and use only the contact option currently listed.

Check the current contact option · Compare a statement with its source · Read selected publication changes

The publication history is not a correction-request tracker. No request is shown as received, reviewed or resolved unless a corresponding record exists.