Canada Perspective (canadaperspective.org) is owned and operated by Northern Beacon Media Inc., an Ontario corporation (Ontario Business Registry company number 1003194827). This Fact-Checking Policy outlines the standards and procedures our newsroom follows to verify every element of an article before publication and to correct any errors that may be discovered afterward. As an independent digital news publisher, we hold ourselves to the same rigorous standards we demand of the institutions we cover.
What do we verify before publication?
We verify every factual claim, data point, name, date, quotation, and statistic that appears in an article. Our fact-checking process begins with the named writer and continues through an editor and the Standards & Fact-Checking Lead, Andrew Leblanc. No article is published unless each claim has been confirmed against at least one primary source or two independent secondary sources, with preference given to official documents, direct interviews, and original data. Exceptions are clearly noted.
For stories involving government policy, legal rulings, or corporate reporting, we obtain and review the original text or recording whenever possible. When a source cannot be named publicly due to legitimate confidentiality concerns, we require the reporter to share the source’s identity and corroborating materials with the Standards Lead. The editorial team, led by Editor-in-Chief Catherine Roy, has final approval on all sensitive verifications.
How do we rank and cite sources?
We maintain a clear hierarchy of source reliability, detailed in our full Sources & Standards guide. At the top are primary sources such as government databases, court documents, peer‑reviewed studies, and on‑the‑record interviews with named individuals. Secondary sources include reputable news organizations with their own fact‑checking processes, academic summaries, and industry reports. Anonymous or crowd‑sourced material is never used as the sole basis for a factual assertion.
Every article includes hyperlinks or citations to the original sources where readers can verify the information themselves. When a source is not publicly accessible – for example, a private document provided under embargo – we state that fact in the article. Our Standards Lead, Andrew Leblanc, periodically audits a random sample of published stories to ensure source links remain live and accurate.
How are unverified claims and rumours handled?
Any claim that cannot be confirmed through our source hierarchy is explicitly labelled as unverified. Rumours, speculation, or statements from parties with a known interest are never presented as fact. If we report on a rumour that is newsworthy in itself – for instance, a widely circulated social‑media post that is influencing public debate – we clearly identify it as a rumour, explain why it is under scrutiny, and provide whatever verification or refutation we have obtained.
Our editorial policy requires that every piece of content identifies the basis for each factual statement. Readers will see phrases such as “according to court records” or “the organization confirmed to Canada Perspective” rather than vague attribution. When verification is ongoing, we add a note at the top or bottom of the article indicating the status and promising an update once confirmation is complete.
How do we handle sensitive or high‑impact articles?
Articles involving allegations of wrongdoing, public‑safety risks, personal reputation, or significant financial consequences are automatically reviewed by the Standards & Fact‑Checking Lead before publication. Andrew Leblanc, in consultation with Editor-in-Chief Catherine Roy, may require additional corroboration, legal review, or a second round of independent fact‑checking. The Managing Editor, Marc Tremblay, is notified of all such reviews.
In these cases, we also ensure that the subjects of the story have been given a reasonable opportunity to respond, in line with our Editorial Policy. No sensitive article is published unless the responsible editor certifies that every factual assertion has been verified to the standard described in this policy. A record of the verification steps is kept on file by the Standards Lead.
How can readers report a fact‑checking issue?
We encourage readers to submit any concern about the accuracy of our reporting directly to the fact‑checking team. Emails sent to factcheck@canadaperspective.org are reviewed by Andrew Leblanc or a designated member of the standards team, usually within one business day. We also accept reports via the general contact form at Contact, but for fastest handling, please use the dedicated fact‑check address.
When we receive a specific claim of error, we investigate by consulting the original sources used in the article and, if necessary, contacting the reporter or editor involved. If the report is anonymous, we still review the merits but may publish a correction only if we can independently verify the error. All substantive reports are logged, and the complainant receives a response acknowledging the review and its outcome.
What is our corrections process?
If an error is confirmed – whether through reader report, internal audit, or a change in underlying facts – we correct the article promptly and transparently. Our full Corrections Policy details the process, but in summary: each correction is appended with a note explaining what was changed, when, and why. Significant errors are also noted in a corrections archive on the article page and on our dedicated corrections page.
Corrections are reviewed by the relevant editor and the Standards Lead before publication. For errors that materially alter the meaning of a story, we publish a standalone clarification or, in rare cases, a retraction. We never silently edit an article after publication; every change is documented. Readers can see the history of each article’s corrections on its page. The Editor-in-Chief, Catherine Roy, is responsible for final sign‑off on all corrections that affect a story’s central thesis.
Our commitments
- We verify every factual claim against at least one primary or two independent secondary sources before publication.
- We clearly label unverified claims, rumours, and speculation as such, never presenting them as fact.
- We subject all sensitive or high‑impact articles to additional review by the Standards & Fact‑Checking Lead and the Editor-in-Chief.
- We respond to all reader fact‑check reports within one business day and investigate every credible claim of error.
- We correct confirmed errors promptly and transparently, with full documentation and a permanent record on the article page.