ScopePress.uk, operated by Rock Bay Media Ltd., is committed to rigorous fact-checking as a cornerstone of our technology journalism. Our Standards & Fact-Checking Lead, Ruth Donovan, oversees a systematic verification process that applies to all published content, ensuring accuracy in technical specifications, benchmark claims, security assertions, pricing, release dates, corporate statements, legal claims, health claims, and stories involving minors. This policy details what we verify, our source hierarchy, and how readers can report potential errors.
What do we verify before publication?
Before any article is published on ScopePress.uk, our editorial team verifies a defined set of factual claims. These include technical specifications for consumer tech products (processor speeds, screen resolutions, battery capacities), benchmark performance claims from manufacturers or third-party testers, security vulnerability details and patch information, pricing and availability data for the UK market, official release dates and launch windows, corporate statements from technology companies, legal claims made in press releases or court filings, health-related claims tied to device usage or digital wellbeing, and any information involving minors, such as age-restricted content or child safety features. Each claim is checked against primary sources before publication.
Our verification process is not a single pass but a layered review. For a product review, for example, the Devices & Reviews Editor Samuel Hart will confirm hardware specifications against official datasheets, while the Standards & Fact-Checking Lead may independently verify benchmark results using our own testing protocols. Claims about security vulnerabilities are cross-referenced with CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures) and vendor advisories. Pricing is checked against UK retailer listings and official storefronts at the time of writing.
What is our source hierarchy for fact-checking?
ScopePress.uk operates on a clear hierarchy of sources to determine the reliability of information. At the top are official company statements, government data (such as Ofcom reports or UK National Cyber Security Centre advisories), court documents, and primary documentation (including patent filings, technical white papers, and SDK release notes). Expert testimony from named, verifiable specialists in relevant fields follows, alongside first-hand testing conducted by our editorial team. We link to our Sources & Standards page and Tech Reporting Standards page for further detail on how we evaluate source credibility.
Anonymous sources are used only in exceptional circumstances, such as whistleblower reports on cybersecurity practices or corporate misconduct, and are subject to additional verification by the Editor-in-Chief Nathan Brooks. When we rely on secondary sources, such as industry analysts or reputable peer publications, we clearly attribute the information and explain why it is being used. All sources are documented in our internal editorial system for audit purposes.
How do we handle rumours and unverified claims?
Any information that cannot be confirmed through our source hierarchy is explicitly labelled as a rumour, speculation, or unverified claim. This includes leaks, pre-release product rumours, and unconfirmed corporate announcements. Such content is clearly marked with language such as “according to unverified reports” or “this claim has not been independently confirmed.” We never present speculation as fact, and we update articles with verified information as soon as it becomes available.
Our AI & Software Correspondent Aisha Khan and Consumer & Gaming Correspondent George Pemberton are specifically trained to flag unverified claims in their beats. If a rumour is published for its newsworthiness, we include a prominent note explaining the status of the claim and a timeline for expected verification. Readers can always see the date of the last fact-check update at the top of any article.
Who reviews sensitive articles before publication?
The Standards & Fact-Checking Lead, Ruth Donovan, personally reviews all articles that involve sensitive topics, including security vulnerabilities, legal disputes, health claims, stories about minors, and any content that could cause reputational or financial harm to individuals or organisations. This review occurs after the initial editorial check by the relevant section editor and before final publication approval by the Editor-in-Chief.
Ruth Donovan also conducts random audits of published articles to ensure ongoing compliance with our fact-checking standards. She maintains a log of all corrections and fact-checking interventions, which is reviewed quarterly by the editorial leadership team. Any systemic issues identified during these audits result in updated training for the relevant editorial staff.
How can readers report a potential error?
Readers who identify a potential factual error in any ScopePress.uk article are encouraged to report it immediately by emailing factcheck@scopepress.uk. This dedicated address is monitored by the Standards & Fact-Checking Lead and the editorial team. Reports should include the article URL, the specific claim in question, and any supporting evidence or sources that contradict the published information.
We aim to acknowledge all fact-check reports within 24 hours during business days. If an error is confirmed, we will issue a correction in accordance with our Corrections Policy. For non-urgent queries or general feedback about accuracy, readers may also use the general contact address info@scopepress.uk. Our full Editorial Policy and Our Team page provide additional context on our standards and personnel.
Our commitments
- We verify every factual claim against primary sources before publication, using our defined source hierarchy.
- We clearly label all rumours, speculation, and unverified claims as such, and update them when confirmation is obtained.
- Our Standards & Fact-Checking Lead personally reviews all sensitive articles involving security, legal, health, or minor-related content.
- We maintain a dedicated factcheck@scopepress.uk email address for reader reports, with a 24-hour acknowledgement target.
- We issue transparent corrections linked to the original article, as detailed in our Corrections Policy, and audit our fact-checking processes quarterly.