Southern Pulse’s fact-checking policy is overseen by Editor-in-Chief Victoria Hayes and enforced daily by Standards & Fact-Checking Lead Thomas Walsh, who verifies every claim against original sources before publication. Pacific Sentinel Digital Pty Ltd (ACN 634 102 887) owns and operates Southern Pulse, with registered offices at Level 14, 1 Martin Place, Sydney NSW 2000, Australia. Our fact-checking process is independent of commercial arrangements, including display advertising, affiliate links and sponsored content, and no advertiser or partner may influence what we check or publish. This policy is part of our broader Editorial Policy and complements our Corrections Policy and Our Team structure.
What does Southern Pulse fact-check?
We verify every factual claim that appears in a published article, including statistics, dates, quotes, names, titles, historical references and data points cited from reports, studies, government documents or other media.
Before any piece is published, the named writer and a section editor check all claims against primary sources. Thomas Walsh, Standards & Fact-Checking Lead, conducts a second review for articles involving sensitive topics, significant public figures, contested policy figures or allegations of misconduct. Claims that cannot be verified through at least two independent primary sources are flagged in the text or removed. Our fact-checking scope covers all content on southernpulse.net, including news, politics, business, technology, culture and public-interest stories.
What is your source hierarchy?
Our source hierarchy prioritises primary, verifiable, contemporaneous records over secondary or anonymous accounts. Official government data, court documents, peer-reviewed studies, on-the-record interviews and original audio or video recordings sit at the top.
We use a detailed Sources & Standards guide that grades sources from Tier 1 (publicly available primary documents) through Tier 4 (anonymous tips that must be corroborated independently before use). Journalists must attribute every factual claim to its source in the article, and the Standards Lead reviews source lists for any article flagged as high-risk. Anonymous sources are used only when the information is of clear public interest, the source faces credible risk, and the material cannot be obtained elsewhere. The editor approving the piece must know the source’s identity.
How do you handle unverified rumours and speculation?
Rumours, speculation and unconfirmed claims are always labelled as such, using clear language such as “unverified reports suggest” or “a claim circulated on social media that cannot be confirmed at this time.”
We do not publish rumour-based headlines, and any article that discusses an unverified allegation must include a prominent note explaining the status of the claim. Thomas Walsh reviews all articles that reference unsubstantiated material to ensure the reader understands what is verified and what is not. If a rumour later proves false, we publish a correction and remove the unverified content from the article archive.
Who reviews sensitive or high-stakes articles?
Thomas Walsh, Standards & Fact-Checking Lead, reviews every article that touches on allegations of corruption, serious misconduct, national security, health risks, financial stability or criminal proceedings before it is published.
The Editor-in-Chief, Victoria Hayes, is also notified and may require additional verification steps, including legal review. This process applies equally to staff-written pieces and contributed or sponsored content. Sensitive articles are held until all sources are confirmed, all parties have been offered a reasonable opportunity to respond, and the fact-check record is signed off by the Standards Lead.
Can readers report a possible error to you?
Yes. Readers can report any suspected factual error by emailing factcheck@southernpulse.net. Our team acknowledges every submission within one business day and investigates the claim through the same source hierarchy used in original reporting.
When a reader flags a potential mistake, Thomas Walsh or a designated editor reviews the claim, consults the original sources and, if an error is confirmed, initiates the correction process under our Corrections Policy. We also accept reports via the general editorial line at +61 2 5550 1900, by mail to Level 14, 1 Martin Place, Sydney NSW 2000, or through the contact form at Contact. Anonymous tips may be submitted via Tip Us, though fact-check inquiries are more effective when the sender is reachable for follow-up.
How does this policy relate to your other standards?
Our fact-checking policy is one component of a comprehensive editorial framework. It operates alongside the Editorial Policy, the Corrections Policy, the AI & Automation Policy and our Ownership & Funding disclosure.
Articles that use AI-assisted tools for research or drafting are subject to the same fact-checking requirements as all other content; human editorial judgement approves every piece regardless of how it was drafted. Our Sponsored Content Policy ensures that paid material is clearly labelled and meets the same verification standards. Charlotte Singh, Culture & Society Editor, and Liam O’Brien, Politics & Public Affairs Editor, each oversee fact-checking within their sections and coordinate with Thomas Walsh on cross-cutting stories.
Our commitments
- We verify every factual claim against at least two independent primary sources before publication.
- We label all unverified rumours, speculation and anonymous claims clearly so readers know their status.
- Thomas Walsh reviews every sensitive or high-stakes article before it is published or broadcast.
- We respond to every reader fact-check report within one business day and correct confirmed errors transparently.
- Our source hierarchy, editorial standards and commercial disclosures are all published openly and updated regularly.