This page sets out the standards Dispatch Times applies to its journalism: how we source and verify what we publish, who writes it, how we handle mistakes, and where the line sits between editorial content and advertising. It is the document referenced as our publishingPrinciples in the structured data on every page of this site.
Who we are and what we cover
Dispatch Times is an independent digital news publisher. We report on UK and international news, with a particular focus on consumer finance, public policy, crime and justice, transport and travel rights, health and technology. Our aim is to explain what a development actually means for readers, and to be specific about what is known, what is not, and where the information came from.
Details of who to contact about the publication are on our Contact page. Advertising and commercial enquiries are handled separately, via Advertise With Us.
Sourcing
Our standard is that a reader should be able to check our work.
- We link to primary sources. Where a story rests on a government release, a court listing, a regulator’s decision, a company statement, a dataset or a published study, we link directly to it rather than to secondary coverage of it.
- We name the source of a claim. Figures, quotations and factual assertions are attributed in the text to the body or document they came from, with the date of publication where that matters.
- We credit other outlets. If a fact was first reported elsewhere and we have not independently confirmed it, we say so and link to the original reporting.
- We distinguish fact from analysis. Where an article contains our interpretation of what something means, it is written so that a reader can tell it apart from the reported facts.
- We do not publish unsourced claims. If we cannot establish where a claim comes from, we leave it out.
Verification
Before publication we check that figures match the source document rather than a summary of it, that quotations are accurate and in context, that dates and locations are correct, and that any image or video used has an identifiable origin. Where a claim is contested, we say who disputes it and on what grounds. Where a story is developing and facts may change, we say that in the article rather than implying more certainty than we have.
We do not publish material sourced solely from anonymous social media accounts, and we do not treat an unverified viral post as a story in itself.
Authorship and bylines
Every article carries a byline identifying who wrote it, linking to an author page that describes that writer’s role and areas of coverage. Where an article is compiled from agency copy or an official statement, that is stated in the article.
Use of artificial intelligence
We use software tools, including AI-assisted tools, for tasks such as research, transcription, summarising long source documents and copy-editing. We do not treat any AI system as a source. A human writer is responsible for every article published on this site: for confirming each factual claim against a primary source, for the wording that appears, and for the decision to publish. Where AI has been used in a way a reader would want to know about — for example to generate an illustration — that is disclosed on the article.
Corrections
We correct errors of fact promptly, openly and without waiting to be pressed.
- Substantive corrections — where an error changes the meaning or the central claim of an article — are marked with a dated correction note at the foot of the article, stating what was wrong and what it has been changed to. We do not silently overwrite the record.
- Minor fixes such as spelling, grammar or broken links are made without a note.
- Updates to a developing story are timestamped so it is clear what was added and when.
- Removal is reserved for cases where an article is legally unsafe or presents a genuine risk of harm. Where an article is removed we say so rather than deleting the page without explanation.
To report an error, use our Contact page and include the article URL and the specific claim you believe is wrong. We aim to acknowledge correction requests within two working days.
Complaints
If you are not satisfied with how we have handled a correction request, or you wish to complain about the conduct or accuracy of our reporting, write to us through the Contact page marking your message “Editorial complaint”. Set out the article, the passage complained of, and the outcome you are seeking. Complaints are reviewed by the editor. We aim to provide a substantive response within ten working days, and we will tell you if it will take longer.
Independence, advertising and affiliate links
Editorial decisions are made independently of commercial considerations. Advertisers have no input into what we cover or how we cover it, and no advance sight of editorial content.
- Advertising displayed on this site is served through third-party advertising networks and is not an endorsement by Dispatch Times.
- Sponsored or paid content, if published, is labelled as such at the top of the article and is not written by our editorial staff.
- Where an article contains an affiliate link that may earn us a commission, this is disclosed on the article. Affiliate arrangements do not determine which products we write about or what we say about them.
Our Privacy Policy, Terms and Conditions and Disclaimer set out the other terms on which this site is provided.
Plagiarism and originality
Passing off another person’s work as our own is a dismissal-level breach. Quoted material is presented as a quotation and attributed. We do not reproduce other outlets’ articles at length, and we do not republish press releases as though they were our own reporting.
Reader contact
We welcome tips, documents and corrections from readers. Anything sent to us is treated in confidence where confidentiality is requested, and we will not identify a source who has asked not to be named.
This policy is reviewed periodically. Last reviewed: 10 August 2026.