Corrections Policy

Mistakes get fixed where they were made

Any publication that repairs its errors quietly is asking readers to extend trust it has not earned. THUNDER TIGER repairs them in daylight, inside the article that carried the mistake, with a note stating what was wrong and what replaced it. That happens the same way whether the error surfaced through a reader, a source, a press office or one of us noticing, and the same way whether the subject was a central bank or a console launch.

The purpose is not contrition. It is that the record you rely on should be right, and that the frequency of our mistakes should be visible to you rather than known only to us.

Three kinds of change, three different labels

A correction repairs something that was factually untrue: a misspelled name, a wrong figure, the wrong date, the wrong currency, a misreported result, an incorrect job description, a mangled quotation, a statement attributed to the wrong person. This is the serious category and it never appears without a note.

A clarification deals with material that was true but incomplete or open to being read the wrong way. A price quoted without naming the market it applied in, or a research finding given without the number of participants behind it, is clarified. A note goes on that too.

An update extends a story that has kept moving: a statement that has since arrived, a result now official, a safety notice now broadened, a court that has now decided. Each update carries the time it was made. Updates are not corrections, because the original said nothing untrue at the moment it was written. Blurring those two categories is how errors get laundered into revisions, and we work hard at not doing it.

A typographical slip or a broken piece of formatting that leaves the meaning untouched is fixed without a note. If you think something we treated as cosmetic actually moved the sense, say so and a note goes on.

Reporting an error to us

Put CORRECTION at the head of your subject line and write to support@thundertiger-europe.com. Give us the link, reproduce the exact wording or figure you are challenging, tell us what you think the truth is, and say how you know. Where a filing, a fixture list, a published record or an official announcement settles the point, sending it turns a several day exchange into a five minute edit.

Having no involvement in a story is no obstacle to reporting a mistake in it. Someone who spotted that we ran two similarly named companies together, or confused two athletes sharing a surname, has done exactly the thing we hope for. All the other ways of reaching us are listed on our contact page.

Where the objection is to emphasis, tone or the framing of a headline, and no factual error is alleged, the message goes to the same address and is logged as a complaint rather than a correction. Wherever it can be arranged, an editor with no involvement in the piece reads it, and a written answer follows.

What we do with your message

It is read the day it lands. An editor goes back to the material the article was built from and sets it against whatever you have supplied. Where you are right, the article is fixed, a note is attached and you are told what changed. Where we believe the article stands, you get the reasoning and the evidence behind it, and you are free to come back with more.

Where the question cannot be settled straight away, we do not leave the disputed wording standing as though it were established. It is either softened or marked as contested until we know. Simple errors are usually gone within hours of the message arriving. Anything requiring a response from an organisation, a records request or a document not yet in our hands can take days, and where it does we say where the process has reached rather than leaving you waiting in silence.

Where the note sits and what it admits

Notes appear inside the article, placed at the head for serious errors and at the foot for small ones, carrying the date and time of the change. The mistake is also repaired in the body of the text; we do not leave a wrong number sitting in a paragraph with the right one bolted underneath it.

Errors that reached the headline are identified as such in the note, because a headline travels much further than the article beneath it. Where the article went out on a social account with the error repeated in the accompanying message, the correction is issued there as well. Where a caption carried the error, the caption is fixed and the note records what it previously said.

Errors that cost readers something

Some mistakes are more expensive than others, and those move to the front of the queue regardless of how small the edit turns out to be. A price or a conversion rate. A percentage calculated from the wrong base. A dose, a contraindication or a trial outcome. A start time given in the wrong zone. An entry requirement that has since been replaced. A safety notice attributed to the wrong production run. All of these take a note at the top of the article rather than the bottom, and the correction is pushed out again wherever the original travelled.

Where somebody has been misidentified, or words have been put in the wrong mouth, we go to the person affected directly if we can reach them rather than leaving them to stumble across the fix.

Asking us to delete a story

Accurate reporting does not come down because it has become awkward for a business, a club, an official or somebody in public life. An accurate article is part of the record, and deleting it misleads everybody who arrives later. What we will do is correct anything wrong in it and add an update covering what has happened since. In the narrow situation of a private individual, where public interest has receded and continuing harm is serious, removing a name is considered on the facts by an editor and answered in writing.

Live coverage, and what the log is for

During fast moving events, a count, a final, an emergency, a market shock, a launch, early accounts shift under you. Such stories are flagged as developing, every change is timestamped, and where something we published turns out to have been wrong the update says so plainly instead of the text quietly changing shape. A figure given at a briefing and later contradicted by the official record is corrected to the record, with both numbers visible so readers can see what moved.

Every correction and clarification is recorded internally: the article, the error, the fix, who raised it and when. That log is read for repetition, because the same mistake happening repeatedly is a broken process rather than misfortune, and it gets repaired at the level of the process. Several rules on our fact-checking policy page exist because the log demanded them, and our editorial standards are revised on the same evidence.