Corrections and retractions

Our commitment

We do not quietly edit a published report to make an error disappear. When something material changes, the report says that it changed, and the previous position remains part of the record. A reader who saw the original should be able to tell what we got wrong.

The difference between a correction and a retraction

A correction is used when the report should stand but something in it is wrong or has moved on: a mis-stated record count, a wrong sector, a verification label that should change now that we know more, or a clarification of what a source actually claimed. The report stays published and is marked as corrected.

A retraction is used when the report should not have been published as it was: the underlying claim was false, the wrong organisation was named, or the evidence does not support what we said. A retracted report is removed from the threat feed and from search, and its imagery stops being served.

A retracted report keeps a transparency record. We think it is worse to make a mistaken report vanish — leaving anyone who acted on it with no way to discover it was withdrawn — than to state plainly that it was retracted and why.

What triggers each

• Correction: a factual detail is wrong; a verification label or confidence level should change; an affected organisation provides information that alters the picture; a redaction needs tightening.
• Retraction: the claim is shown to be false or fabricated; the wrong organisation was identified; the evidence turns out not to support publication; or continued publication would cause harm we cannot mitigate by correcting.

How to request one

Anyone can ask — you do not need to be the subject of the report.

• Use the correction form: request a correction. This is the fastest route and it reaches the editorial queue directly.
• If you represent a named organisation: use affected organisation. Those messages are prioritised, and we will record your position — including a denial — even where we continue to publish.
• By email: support@threatbharat.com.

Tell us which report you mean, what specifically is wrong, and — if you can — what the correct position is. Evidence helps but is not required to make a request.

What happens after you ask

1. We acknowledge the request.
2. An analyst who did not author the report assesses it against the evidence on file. Nobody reviews their own work.
3. We correct, retract, or explain why the report stands. If we disagree with you, we will say so and give our reasoning.
4. Where we correct or retract, the change is visible on the report itself, not only in our records.

A request that concerns personal data or an unredacted detail is treated as urgent and is acted on before the rest of the queue.

What stays visible

• That the report was corrected or retracted, and when.
• What changed, in terms a reader can follow.
• For a retraction, that the report was withdrawn — the unsafe content itself is not kept on display.

What we will not do

We will not remove an accurate, properly evidenced report because its subject would prefer it were not public. We will not replace a report’s content while leaving its publication date implying the new text was there all along. And we will not treat a legal threat as a substitute for showing us what is factually wrong.

Publication is never a statement that a dataset is authentic or that a breach is confirmed — see responsible publication. If a report is being read that way, that itself is worth telling us about.