At Sonderanalyse, every article we publish has been fact-checked before going live. Our fact-checking process is a core part of our editorial workflow and is overseen by our dedicated fact-checking lead, Anna Engels, who reports directly to the editor-in-chief, Matthias Richter. We verify factual claims, check the reliability of sources and ensure that speculation is clearly labelled. This policy explains what we check, how we decide which sources to trust, and how we handle mistakes.
What do we verify before publication?
We verify every factual claim that appears in our reporting, including statistics, dates, names, quotations, data points, and any assertion about public policy, economics, or current events that a reasonable reader might rely upon. Each article is checked against primary sources before it is approved by an editor.
Our verification process includes direct consultation of official documents, parliamentary records, court rulings, and publicly available databases. When a claim originates from a secondary source, we trace it back to its origin where possible. We do not publish unverified assertions, and any information that cannot be confirmed is either removed or clearly attributed to the source making the claim, with an explicit note about its status.
How do we rank the reliability of sources?
We maintain a clear source hierarchy, detailed in our Sources & Standards page. At the top are primary documents, official government and agency reports, legally binding texts, and direct eyewitness testimony from named individuals whose credibility we have assessed. Below that are reputable media outlets whose editorial standards we know, peer-reviewed research, and recognised expert organisations.
Anonymous or confidential sources are used only when the information is of clear public interest and cannot be obtained otherwise, and their identity is known to at least two senior editors. Sources with a known bias or a financial interest in the subject are flagged to the reader. Our fact-checking team, led by Anna Engels, reviews all source selections for sensitive articles before publication.
How do we handle rumours or unverified claims?
Rumours, unverified social-media posts, and speculative claims are never presented as fact. If we report on a rumour that is circulating publicly – for example, in the context of explaining what is being said about a political figure or policy – we label it explicitly as a rumour and explain why it cannot be confirmed. The same applies to unverified claims made by third parties.
In those cases, we include a clear disclaimer such as “this claim has not been independently verified by Sonderanalyse” and we direct readers to any steps we have taken to check it. We never amplify speculation without context, and we remove or correct any rumour that is later proven false.
Who oversees fact-checking for sensitive articles?
Our fact-checking lead, Anna Engels, is responsible for the overall fact-checking workflow and personally reviews any article that touches on sensitive topics, including national security, public health, criminal investigations, or matters involving vulnerable individuals. The editor-in-chief, Matthias Richter, is consulted on any article where the factual record is disputed or where publication carries significant risk of harm if errors appear.
For such articles, we also require an additional layer of review by a second fact-checker or a subject-matter expert outside the regular team. This is documented in our editorial log and is part of the standard procedure outlined in our editorial policy.
What you can expect from us
You can expect that every article you read on Sonderanalyse has been subjected to a formal fact-checking step before publication. We do not use artificial intelligence to generate claims, sources, or quotations; any AI-assisted tools are limited to research, formatting, and metadata tasks, and all output is reviewed by a human editor. Our fact-checkers are named journalists whose work is visible in our team directory, and they are reachable directly at factcheck@sonderanalyse.de.
We also provide a clear path for readers to report potential errors or omissions. If you believe something is inaccurate or needs further verification, please send the details and supporting evidence to our fact-checking desk. We treat every reader report seriously and respond within five working days.
How do we handle corrections?
When an error is confirmed – whether discovered internally or reported by a reader – we correct the article promptly and publish a detailed correction note at the top of the page. Our correction policy is set out fully at /corrections-policy/. All corrections are logged and are visible to readers; we never silently edit an article without documenting the change.
For factual errors that could mislead a reader about a significant issue, we also issue a correction notice on our homepage and in our newsletter, and we update any social-media posts that linked to the incorrect version. If the error affects the overall conclusion of an article, we may retract or replace the piece entirely, again with a clear public note.
How can readers report a fact-checking concern?
Readers can report potential errors, missing context, or questions about source reliability by writing to factcheck@sonderanalyse.de. Please include the URL of the article, a description of the issue, and any supporting evidence you can provide. Our fact-checking team reviews all incoming reports, and the sender will receive an acknowledgement within 48 hours.
For concerns that involve editorial judgement rather than factual accuracy – such as bias, fairness, or omission – readers are invited to use our complaints procedure, described in /complaints-procedure/. For immediate corrections, the corrections desk can be reached directly at corrections@sonderanalyse.de.
Questions or concerns?
If you have any questions about our fact-checking methods, source hierarchy, or this policy in general, please contact our editor-in-chief, Matthias Richter, at anders.lindqvist@sonderanalyse.de or our fact-checking lead, Anna Engels, at emma.sandberg@sonderanalyse.de. You can also review our full editorial policy and source standards for a deeper understanding of how we work.