How we report

Editorial standards

Our first obligation is accuracy, clarity and fairness to readers and the people we cover. We distinguish reported facts from analysis, context and opinion. We do not publish a claim simply because it is widely repeated, convenient or generated by a system.

Our editorial standard is that factual reporting is grounded in named, publicly available sources. We favour primary records such as official releases, public documents, direct statements and original datasets. If a fact cannot be checked, we leave it out or clearly label it as unconfirmed.

Sources are not proof of truth by themselves. We compare material where possible, check dates and context, attribute information precisely, and avoid presenting allegations as established facts. Anonymous tips can help us find a story, but they are not sufficient evidence for publication without independent verification.

Sourcing and citations

Readers should be able to follow the record behind our reporting. Articles display linked source material where it underpins the reporting, favouring original records over generic attribution. Guides and explainers point to official sources for changing figures, rules, dates and fees.

We synthesise and attribute information, respect copyright and licensing requirements, and correct links or attributions when they are wrong. Court and other sensitive records are handled conservatively, with links to the official record where appropriate rather than unnecessary reproduction.

Corrections policy

We correct material errors promptly and transparently. When a published article needs a meaningful factual correction, we update the article and add a visible correction note explaining what changed. Minor spelling or formatting fixes may be made without a note when they do not alter meaning.

Our corrections and complaints page explains how to report an error and what information helps us investigate.

Request a correction or right of reply

Use the form below to ask us to correct something or to respond to our coverage. You will get a reference number straight away.

Complaints and commercial independence

Questions about reporting, source use, a byline, a correction or a possible standards breach are welcome. Please use our contact page and include enough detail for us to identify the story and understand your concern.

Credible complaints are considered by the publisher or editorial desk. Advertising does not determine editorial conclusions, and paid or sponsored material is labelled so readers can distinguish it from independent editorial coverage.

AI-assisted journalism disclosure

AI assists with research, summarising, drafting and routine local-news coverage on The Daily Canberra. The publication remains accountable for what appears under this masthead.

Automated checks assess sourcing, accuracy and editorial risk before publication. Sensitive material is held for human review. Lower-risk news, guides and roundups may publish automatically after clearing the relevant checks.

We do not invent reporters, biographies, quotes or eyewitness accounts. Automated pieces are identified by the publication or desk, not by a fictional human author. We disclose the role of AI without publishing security controls, private operating methods or other information that would weaken the newsroom's safeguards.

Founder and independence

Shane Anderson is the Founder. The sites share common ownership as part of the Daily Network and are produced centrally by one small, technology-led team rather than by a separate local newsroom in each city. The Network is editorially independent of any large media group, political organisation or institutional investor. Corrections can be requested at corrections@dailynetwork.news.

Accountability

The Daily Canberra is accountable for the accuracy and standards of its journalism. If you believe we have fallen short, please tell us. We would rather explain our work, correct the record and improve the system than leave a reader to guess what happened.