Methodology & corrections
The voice may be rowdy. The evidence rules are not. Here is how automated stories earn their way onto the site.
Signals ain't facts
Google Trends, social networks, forums, and aggregators tell us what people are noticing. They never count as confirmation by themselves.
Two independent receipts
Breaking coverage requires two independent trustworthy sources, including at least one primary source or top-tier newsroom.
Original synthesis
The system builds a claim-by-claim research packet, writes an original article, links its sources, and checks for copied phrasing and duplicate coverage.
Corrections stay visible
Material updates create a revision entry. Corrections are labeled on the article instead of quietly disappearing down a digital creek.
Breaking-story gate
A topic must spike across at least two independent trend channels. The factual claims must then be confirmed by two independent trusted sources, one of which is primary or top-tier. Conflicting evidence, missing citations, or a near-duplicate story blocks publication.
Forecasts and science fiction
Forecasts are labeled with a horizon, assumptions, and confidence. Science-fiction coverage discusses culture and its relationship to real technology; fictional claims are never presented as current events.
The Alabama voice
Stories use a deliberately exaggerated, family-near-friendly Alabama narrator with occasional mild profanity. Names, quotations, technical terms, and numerical facts remain standard and exact. Slurs, harassment, and demeaning stereotypes are prohibited.
Report a correction
Production deployments should set a public editorial contact address and monitor it alongside automated source-health alerts. Every accepted correction creates a dated revision record.