How TVN Approaches Evidence, Analysis, and Corrections

Trust grows when readers can examine how a conclusion was reached. TVN's editorial approach starts with making that reasoning visible.

A modern printing press, photographed in 2014. How a claim is distributed is separate from the evidence supporting it. Photo: André Robillard. Source · CC0. Image unmodified.

Evidence before interpretation

Start with the original source. Where available, use the document, dataset, full transcript, or original recording behind a claim. Secondary reporting can add essential context, but a source's reputation doesn't settle every factual question.

Separate the layers. Identify established facts, attributed claims, analysis, opinion, and open questions. An official statement establishes what an official said; additional evidence may be needed to establish the underlying event.

Match confidence to evidence. Check dates, definitions, scope, and limitations. Explain when a conclusion is tentative. Avoid treating multiple stories based on the same source as independent confirmation.

Apply the same standard across political lines. A claim doesn't become reliable because it supports our preferences, and it doesn't become false because an opponent made it.

Analysis should show its work

Make corrections visible. When a material factual error is identified, the appropriate response is to correct it and explain what changed. Distinguish a correction to an error from an update based on new information.

Keep discussion focused on the argument. Strong disagreement is welcome. Address the claim, show the evidence, and leave room for someone to change their mind.

If you spot a possible error, include the article title, the specific statement, and the original source that challenges it. A precise correction helps everyone assess the same evidence.