Corrections & Complaints Policy

Purpose and scope

SiliconJury welcomes specific, good-faith reports that can improve factual accuracy, sourcing, language, representation, rights handling, accessibility or the operation of the service. This policy covers public episodes, localized editions, editorial pages, metadata and technical surfaces.

Disagreement is not automatically an error. Reviews distinguish verifiable mistakes from reasonable editorial judgment and contested historical interpretation, while still considering whether presentation is misleading or lacks necessary context.

Types of corrections and complaints

• Objective factual correction
• Source or quotation error
• Translation or localization error
• Pronunciation issue
• Editorial disagreement
• Contested historical interpretation
• Misleading generated representation
• Privacy request
• Copyright or trademark notice
• Likeness, voice or personality-right concern
• Accessibility issue
• Platform or technical issue

What to include in a report

Identify the affected episode, edition, page or asset; describe the exact statement, timestamp or behavior; choose the closest concern category; explain the requested correction; and include reliable evidence or sources when relevant. Separate multiple unrelated concerns so each can be reviewed accurately.

Do not submit passwords, identity documents, confidential legal material or unnecessary sensitive personal data through the ordinary form. Rights and privacy reports may move to a more appropriate follow-up channel if verification is needed.

Case records and status

A submission accepted through the concern form receives a unique case reference. The internal record is designed to preserve the date received, category, affected content, evidence, assigned ownership, status transitions, resolution, correction publication date and material-change note.

Case information is restricted to people who need it for review and operation. Public correction notes describe the change without publishing a reporter’s personal or confidential information.

Assessment process

• Triage the category, urgency and affected content.
• Preserve the relevant version and available evidence.
• Compare the report with sources, production records and policy requirements.
• Seek focused clarification or specialist review where necessary.
• Record the decision, action and rationale at an appropriate level of detail.

Safety, privacy or credible rights risks may justify temporary restriction while review continues. A complex issue may remain open while evidence is collected; no fixed response-time promise is made on this page.

Possible outcomes

An outcome may include no change with an explanation, a source or attribution update, text or caption correction, pronunciation or translation repair, added context, a visible correction note, replacement of media, distribution restriction, removal, referral to the rights or privacy process, or a technical fix.

Editorial disagreement may be recorded without changing the work. A decision can be revisited when materially new evidence or a clearer formulation is supplied.

Material corrections and public history

A correction is material when it changes a significant factual claim, quotation, attribution, representation, verdict context, rights status or the viewer’s reasonable understanding of the episode. Material corrections should appear visibly on the episode page with the correction date and a concise description.

SiliconJury should preserve content and policy version history so meaningful changes are not silently overwritten. Minor spelling, formatting or accessibility repairs that do not alter meaning may be made without a prominent correction note, while still remaining auditable internally where appropriate.

Privacy, rights and accessibility paths

Privacy requests are handled under the Privacy Notice. Copyright, trademark, license, image, voice, likeness and personality-right concerns follow the Rights, Copyright & Content Concerns Policy. Accessibility reports follow the Accessibility Statement. Using the closest category helps protect sensitive information and route the case appropriately.

Submit a correction or complaint

Use the monitored concern form and keep the case reference supplied after submission. That reference allows later communication to be connected to the same record. Public comments are not a reliable channel for private, rights-sensitive or security-related reports.