About Ol' Blighty
Ol' Blighty is a digital news publication for UK readers, published by Turing Innova. This page explains how our journalism is produced and checked, what its limits are, and how to reach us when we get something wrong.
How our journalism is produced
Articles on Ol' Blighty are written by an automated editorial system, not by human journalists. We think that is a reasonable thing to do carefully, and an unreasonable thing to do quietly — which is why this page exists.
There is no human editor reading each article before it goes out. The checks described below are the gate a story must pass, and we would rather tell you that plainly than let you assume otherwise.
Where our reporting comes from
Every story begins with reporting published by established news organisations. The system does not write about an event on the strength of a single report: it waits until more than one independent source has covered it, and it works from the facts those sources agree on. It cannot draw on a source it has not actually read.
How articles are checked
Before publication, every article passes a series of automated integrity checks:
- Quotations must appear word for word in the source reporting we hold. A quotation that cannot be matched to a source is removed.
- Figures are guarded through the writing process itself. If a late editing stage introduces a number that was not in the material it was given, that stage's work is discarded and the earlier version of the article restored.
- Claims are compared against the sources by a separate automated audit. An article containing a claim its sources contradict, or a significant figure they do not support, is held back as an unpublished draft.
These checks hold back a portion of the articles the system writes every day. We would rather publish less than publish something the sources do not support.
What these checks do not catch
Automated checks are good at catching invention — a number or a quotation with no basis in the sources. They are weaker against subtler errors: a genuine fact attached to the wrong person, or a claim one source reported tentatively, restated here with more confidence than the original carried. Errors of that kind do sometimes reach publication, and when we get something wrong it is more likely to be an error of that kind than an outright fabrication.
We set this out because it is true, and because it tells you what to watch for as a reader. Treat a single article here as you would any single account of a developing story, and if you believe we have made an error, tell us — the address is below. Improving on exactly this class of error is the main ongoing work on the system.
Bylines
The named writers on Ol' Blighty are editorial personas: consistent voices, each with a defined beat, produced by the system described above. They are not real people, they have no lives or credentials beyond their work here, and they should not be read as claiming otherwise. We use persona bylines to keep each strand of coverage in a recognisable voice — not to imply human authorship, which this page exists to disclaim.
Images
Unless a caption says otherwise, the images illustrating our articles are AI-generated. They are illustrations of the story's subject, not photographs of the events described.
Corrections
If you believe something we have published is inaccurate, email [email protected] with a link to the article and what you believe is wrong. Every message is read by a person — this is one part of the operation that is not automated.
When we have got something wrong, we correct the article and add a note recording what was changed and when. Where the error was serious, the note says so plainly. We are a small operation and do not promise a response time we might fail to keep, but correction requests take priority over new publishing.
Stories that are still developing are routinely revised as new reporting arrives. A correction note is reserved for things we got wrong — not for stories that simply moved on.
Ownership and independence
Ol' Blighty is published by Turing Innova, an independent publisher. We are self-funded, we carry no advertising or sponsored content, and no outside organisation pays for, places, or approves our coverage. If any of that changes, this page will change first.
We are not currently members of IPSO or IMPRESS, the UK press regulators; complaints come directly to the publisher at the address above. We treat the Editors' Code of Practice — in particular its requirements on accuracy and the prompt correction of significant error — as the reference point for how we handle them.
Contact
For corrections, complaints, and everything else: [email protected].