Who is responsible for fact-checking at Sachspur?
Fact-checking at Sachspur is overseen by Vanessa Frank, Ansvarig för faktagranskning, who reports directly to Chefredaktör Benjamin Krämer. The ultimate editorial responsibility for accuracy lies with the publisher, Sachspur Media Ltd., a private company registered in Gibraltar (company number C 92009, Malta Business Registry).
Vanessa Frank leads a dedicated team of fact-checkers and coordinates with the editorial desk. Every article is reviewed by an editor before publication; the fact-checking team works alongside reporters to verify claims, sources and data. No article is published without human editorial approval, and the Standards Lead (Benjamin Krämer) personally reviews any piece that raises sensitive verification questions.
What do we verify?
Sachspur verifies all factual claims that are central to a story, including statistics, quotations, dates, names, official documents and data from surveys or reports. We also verify the credentials of sources and the context of any cited material.
Our verification scope covers Swedish politics, economics, culture and society, as well as international developments reported in our coverage. We check primary sources such as government press releases, court rulings, company filings, academic studies and official datasets. Where direct access is limited, we rely on trusted secondary sources and clearly note any gaps. Claims that cannot be substantiated through multiple independent channels are flagged and, if necessary, omitted or presented with appropriate caveats.
How do we source information?
Sachspur operates a clear source hierarchy, prioritising primary documents, official records, peer-reviewed research and direct interviews over secondary reports. A detailed breakdown of our source standards is available at our Sources & Standards page.
We require at least two independent sources for any contested or high-impact factual claim. Journalists must document their sourcing in the editorial system, and fact-checkers review these records before publication. Anonymous sources are used only when the information cannot be obtained otherwise and the source’s credibility can be internally verified; their use is always approved by the Chefredaktör or the Redaktionschef. All sources are attributed to the fullest extent possible without compromising safety or confidentiality.
How do we handle unverified claims and rumours?
Unverified claims and rumours are never presented as facts. Sachspur explicitly labels any speculation or unconfirmed report as “unverified” and explains why it cannot yet be confirmed. We do not amplify rumours for engagement.
When covering a developing story, we clearly distinguish between what is confirmed, what is attributed to a named source, and what remains unconfirmed. If a rumour is widely circulating and newsworthy, we may report its existence but always with a transparent disclaimer about its unverified status. Fact-checkers assess the origin and spread of such claims and may publish a separate verification article if warranted. Readers are encouraged to report suspicious or potentially false content to our fact-checking team at factcheck@sachspur.de.
How are sensitive articles reviewed?
Sensitive articles – those involving allegations of misconduct, national security, vulnerable individuals or significant reputational harm – are reviewed by the Standards Lead, Chefredaktör Benjamin Krämer, before publication. This review includes an additional fact-checking round and legal consultation where necessary.
The Standards Lead may also request input from external experts or relevant regulatory bodies. If an article is found to contain an error after publication, it is corrected promptly and transparently, following our corrections policy. The fact-checking team maintains a log of sensitive reviews to ensure consistency and accountability over time.
How can readers report errors or raise concerns?
Readers can report factual errors or raise concerns by emailing factcheck@sachspur.de. Our fact-checking team acknowledges every report within 48 hours and investigates promptly. Confirmed errors are corrected and documented on our corrections policy page.
For complaints about editorial standards that are not purely factual, please see our complaints procedure. All reports are handled confidentially and with the same rigour we apply to our own verification. We value reader input as an essential part of maintaining trust.
Where can I find more about our editorial standards?
Our full editorial policy, including guidelines on accuracy, impartiality and transparency, is published at /editorial-policy/. Information about our team and their responsibilities is available at /our-team/.
These documents together with this fact-checking policy form the core of our commitment to trustworthy journalism. We also encourage readers to review our ownership and funding disclosure and our AI and automation policy to understand how we operate independently and responsibly.
Our commitments
- We verify every factual claim central to a story using multiple independent sources and primary documents.
- We label unverified claims and rumours clearly and never present speculation as fact.
- We review all sensitive articles by the Standards Lead before publication, with additional fact-checking and legal advice as needed.
- We respond to reader error reports within 48 hours and correct all confirmed mistakes transparently, logging them in our corrections policy.
- We maintain a clear separation between editorial fact-checking and commercial interests, with no sponsor influence over verification outcomes.