Hauptfokus (hauptfokus.de) is owned and operated by Alpen Press Ltd., a private company registered in Gibraltar (company number 132587), with registered office at Office 3.7, ICC, Casemates Square, Gibraltar GX11 1AA. The ultimate responsibility for all fact‑checking procedures rests with Chefredaktör Michael Jung (anders.lindqvist@hauptfokus.de, +46 8 525 030 61) and the dedicated fact‑checking team led by Melanie Hartmann (emma.sandberg@hauptfokus.de, +46 8 525 030 66). Our fact‑checking policy is designed to ensure that every article published meets the highest standards of accuracy and transparency.
Who is responsible for fact‑checking at Hauptfokus?
Fact‑checking at Hauptfokus is overseen by Melanie Hartmann, who leads the fact‑checking team and reports directly to Chefredaktör Michael Jung. Every article is reviewed by an assigned fact‑checker before publication, and the Standards Lead (a senior editor appointed by the Chefredaktör) reviews any sensitive or high‑impact pieces to ensure methodological rigour. The fact‑checking team consists of experienced journalists who verify claims, sources and data independently of the reporting team. Alpen Press Ltd., as the publisher, provides the resources and training necessary to maintain these standards, and the Chefredaktör holds final authority over publication decisions and corrections. Readers can contact the fact‑checking team directly at factcheck@hauptfokus.de.
What do we verify and how do we rank sources?
We verify every factual assertion in our articles, including statistics, quotes, dates, names, legal references and claims made by public figures or institutions. Our source hierarchy is published in full on our Sources & Standards page, but the core principle is that primary sources (official documents, peer‑reviewed studies, original data sets, direct eyewitness accounts) are preferred over secondary or tertiary sources. When a primary source is not available, we use authoritative secondary sources such as recognised news agencies, government databases or credible academic institutions, and we clearly label the basis of the information. Anonymous or confidential sources are used only when the information is of clear public interest and cannot be obtained elsewhere; such sources are subjected to additional verification by the Standards Lead. All source material is logged in our internal system and retained for review.
How are rumours and unverified claims handled?
Rumours, speculative reports and unverified claims are never presented as fact. If a rumour is newsworthy enough to warrant coverage, we explicitly label it as a rumour, attribute it to the original source and explain why it has not been independently confirmed. Our editors add a clear disclaimer, such as “This claim has not been independently verified by Hauptfokus,” and the piece is flagged for ongoing review. As soon as verification is possible, we update the article and publish a correction note if the rumour proves false. No rumour is ever published without the explicit approval of a senior editor. This approach ensures that readers can distinguish between confirmed information and unconfirmed reports.
How do readers report potential errors?
Readers can report any suspected inaccuracy by emailing factcheck@hauptfokus.de. Our fact‑checking team reviews every complaint within two working days and, if an error is confirmed, initiates a correction in line with our Corrections Policy. We also welcome reports via the general contact address info@hauptfokus.de or through the “Report an error” link at the bottom of every article. The identity of the complainant is kept confidential unless they consent to disclosure. All reports are logged and tracked to resolution, and we publish a summary of significant corrections on our Corrections page. Readers who are unsatisfied with the outcome may escalate their concern through our Complaints Procedure.
What role does editorial oversight play?
Editorial oversight is central to our fact‑checking process. The Standards Lead, appointed by Chefredaktör Michael Jung, reviews all articles that touch on sensitive topics – such as criminal allegations, national security, public health risks or investigations into powerful individuals or organisations. This review includes checking the source hierarchy, confirming that all claims are properly attributed and ensuring that any potential conflicts of interest have been declared. The Standards Lead also approves the use of anonymous sources and signs off on any article that relies on a single source for a disputed claim. Our full Editorial Policy and Our Team page provide further detail on the roles and responsibilities of each editor.
Our commitments
- We will verify every factual claim before publication using the highest‑quality sources available.
- We will clearly label rumours, speculation and unverified information whenever they are included in a news story.
- We will respond to every reader‑reported error within two working days and correct it promptly.
- We will subject all sensitive or high‑impact articles to an additional review by the Standards Lead.
- We will maintain a public record of significant corrections and changes on our Corrections page.