Editorial Complaints Procedure

Purpose

DeshiAI accepts formal complaints concerning published content and editorial conduct. This procedure provides a fair, evidence-based and proportionate way to assess whether DeshiAI has failed to meet one of its published editorial standards. It does not require DeshiAI to remove accurate reporting, adopt a complainant’s preferred interpretation or give a subject control over editorial decisions. It does require the publication to consider specific and credible concerns seriously and in good faith.

Correction Requests and Formal Complaints

A correction request concerns a specific factual error or materially misleading statement and should be sent to corrections@deshiai.in. A formal complaint concerns a broader or disputed issue such as serious inaccuracy, unfairness, failure to seek a response, unnecessary privacy intrusion, discrimination, misuse of sources, undisclosed conflicts, concealed sponsorship, incorrect classification, unethical reporting methods, breach of confidentiality, misleading imagery, plagiarism, improper AI use, failure to meet applicable technology or election-related editorial standards, contributor misconduct, failure to correct or disproportionate editorial treatment. Formal complaints should be sent to complaints@deshiai.in.

A factual correction request may become a formal complaint where the requester believes the correction process did not adequately address the issue.

Who May Complain

A complaint may be submitted by a person directly affected, an authorized representative, a legal guardian, an organization named or materially affected, an author or contributor, a source, a reader identifying a significant public-interest concern or another person with a legitimate basis for raising the issue. DeshiAI may request proportionate evidence of authority where someone acts on behalf of another person.

The publication may give greater weight to privacy or personal-harm complaints made by the affected person than to those submitted by an unrelated third party. A reader may nevertheless identify a factual, ethical, technical or systemic concern without being personally affected.

Required Information

A formal complaint should include the complainant’s name and contact details, organization where relevant, authority to act for another person where applicable, article title, exact URL, publication date where known, exact passage, image or conduct being challenged, relevant policy or principle, detailed explanation, supporting evidence, previous correspondence, date the issue was discovered, remedy requested and any material deadline.

The complaint should distinguish factual error from disagreement with analysis, objection to opinion, privacy concern, legal allegation, later development or dissatisfaction with tone. Unrelated sensitive personal information should not be included.

Timing

A complaint should normally be submitted within a reasonable period after publication or after the issue becomes known. DeshiAI may review an older matter where the article remains accessible, an alleged error continues to cause harm, significant new evidence has emerged, the complaint concerns serious misconduct, the complainant could not reasonably have raised it earlier, the article was materially changed or public-interest accountability justifies review. The passage of time may affect available records, source availability and possible remedies.

Acknowledgement

DeshiAI aims to acknowledge a specific formal complaint within five business days. The acknowledgement confirms receipt, identifies whether additional information is needed, states the applicable review process and makes clear that acknowledgement does not mean the complaint has been upheld. Complex, legal, confidential, technical or cross-border matters may require additional time.

Initial Assessment and Scope

The initial assessment considers whether the complaint concerns a DeshiAI publication or editorial action, is sufficiently specific, falls within applicable editorial policies, is better handled as a correction, privacy, copyright, security or commercial matter, contains enough evidence to begin review, duplicates a previously resolved complaint, concerns active proceedings, presents an immediate safety concern or requires preservation of records. The matter may be redirected where another process is more appropriate.

The review identifies the precise issues, such as whether a factual statement was inaccurate, a headline created a misleading impression, the article was appropriately classified, a significant subject received a reasonable opportunity to respond, private information was necessary, a conflict was disclosed, commercial content was clearly identified, anonymous sourcing was responsibly handled, synthetic or AI-generated material required clearer disclosure, contributor identity was accurately represented or a correction remedy was proportionate.

Evidence Considered

The review may consider the published article, previous versions, headline, images, captions, metadata, structured data, source notes, documents, recordings, correspondence, requests for response, contributor declarations, conflict records, commercial agreements, editorial notes, legal status, correction history, complainant evidence, author response, affected-party response and relevant public editorial standards.

Confidential source identity is not disclosed simply because a complainant requests it. The reviewer may assess underlying evidence while maintaining appropriate source protections.

Author and Editor Response

The author and responsible editor may be asked to explain the factual basis, source selection, classification, wording, right-of-reply process, conflict assessment, public-interest reasoning, privacy decision, disclosure, AI use, image selection, update history and post-publication action. Their explanation is relevant but not conclusive. The review assesses the published material against DeshiAI’s applicable standards.

Independence of Review

Where reasonably possible, an appeal or serious complaint should be reviewed by someone who was not responsible for the original decision. In a smaller publication, complete institutional separation may not always be practical. Safeguards may include fresh evidence review, a second qualified reviewer, external technical or specialist advice, legal review, documented reasoning, separation from commercial personnel, disclosure of unavoidable limitations or publisher-level review. The original decision should not simply be repeated without reconsidering the evidence.

Standard of Review

A complaint is assessed against the evidence available at publication, evidence that should reasonably have been sought, article classification, level of risk, applicable policy, public interest, proportionality, subsequent evidence, effect on readers and affected people, and whether any remedy already provided was sufficient. The review distinguishes reasonable editorial judgment, factual error, policy breach, process weakness, later development and genuine difference of opinion.

Findings

A complaint may be Not Upheld where the evidence does not establish a breach, Partly Upheld where one or more aspects failed to meet standards but others did not, or Upheld where a material breach is established. It may be Resolved Informally where an agreed correction, clarification or response adequately addresses the concern, Unable to Determine where evidence is genuinely insufficient or irreconcilably disputed, or Outside Scope where the matter does not concern DeshiAI’s editorial standards or belongs under another process.

Unable to Determine should not be used where further reasonable verification could materially resolve the issue.

Remedies

A remedy may include factual correction, clarification, editor’s note, headline change, caption correction, metadata correction, disclosure, reclassification, substantive update, addition of a right of reply, anonymization, removal of unnecessary personal information, link correction, image replacement, accessibility correction, restriction, de-indexing, retraction, removal, contributor action, commercial-relationship review, policy change, process improvement, training or a public explanation.

The remedy should be proportionate to the nature and impact of the breach. A complainant is not automatically entitled to the precise remedy requested.

Public Notice

Where a complaint results in a material correction, the article should receive an appropriate public note and the outcome may be recorded in a Public Corrections Log. A significant correction should not normally be concealed through silent editing. Where privacy, child safety, confidential sources, defamation or security considerations prevent detailed disclosure, DeshiAI may describe the action at a higher level.

Right of Reply

A right of reply may be appropriate where a person or organization materially criticized in an article has a relevant factual response that was not previously included. The response may be quoted, summarized, linked, added as an update or published separately. It may be declined where irrelevant, abusive, unsafe or legally problematic. A right of reply does not give a subject control over the article’s conclusion or require accurate evidence to be removed.

Outcome and Timing

A reasoned outcome normally identifies the complaint, applicable standard, evidence considered, finding, reasoning, remedy, public action, appeal route and date. DeshiAI aims to provide an outcome within a proportionate period. A straightforward matter may be resolved quickly, while a complex complaint involving confidential sources, technical evidence, multiple jurisdictions, legal review or numerous allegations may require substantially longer. Where review is delayed, a progress update may be provided where reasonably possible. Response targets are operational goals rather than absolute guarantees.

Appeal

A complainant may request an appeal by identifying a material factual error in the decision, new evidence, overlooked evidence, incorrect application of policy, lack of fair process, a conflict in the original review or a disproportionate remedy. The appeal should be submitted within a reasonable period and explain the specific ground rather than simply repeating the original complaint. Where possible, the appeal should receive review from an uninvolved responsible person or through an additional independent safeguard.

After a reasoned appeal outcome, DeshiAI may close the matter unless significant new evidence emerges, the decision contains a material error, a legal or regulatory development changes the position, continuing safety or privacy concerns arise or public-interest accountability requires reopening. Repetitive correspondence without new grounds may be limited.

Abusive or Manipative Complaints

DeshiAI may limit communication that is threatening, discriminatory, harassing, automated, intentionally deceptive, persistently repetitive, unrelated to a specific issue, designed to expose a confidential source, intended to overwhelm the process or forms part of coordinated intimidation. An abusive tone does not by itself invalidate a specific factual concern, and the publication should separate the substance of an issue from the manner in which it is communicated where reasonably possible.

Legal Threats

A legal threat does not automatically convert an editorial complaint into a legal-only matter. DeshiAI may preserve records and obtain legal advice while continuing to examine factual and editorial concerns. The publication does not reject a valid correction simply because the complainant has also threatened legal action. A formal legal demand should identify the specific basis, jurisdiction and remedy being sought.

Privacy and Records

Complaint information is accessible only to people who reasonably need it for the review. DeshiAI does not publish identity documents, private addresses, medical information, confidential source details, children’s information, legal strategy, unrelated personal records or sensitive correspondence unless publication is lawful, necessary and proportionate. Complaint records are retained according to editorial, legal, privacy and accountability requirements.

Commercial and AI Complaints

Complaints concerning advertising, sponsorship, affiliate relationships or Partner Content may involve missing labels, inadequate disclosure, false claims, concealed clients, deceptive links, advertiser influence, fabricated testimonials, synthetic endorsements, political advertising, unsafe products or material incorrectly presented as independent editorial content. Commercial personnel should not make the final determination about whether commercial status was adequately disclosed.

AI-related complaints may concern fabricated citations, false quotations, undisclosed synthetic images, misleading reconstructions, automated mistranslation, fictitious authors, unverified generated claims, privacy violations or automated plagiarism. The review may consider which tools were used, how human verification was performed and whether the use of AI or synthetic media was adequately disclosed.

Contributor Complaints and Transparency

Contributors may use this procedure for material misrepresentation of their work, undisclosed editorial changes, plagiarism, false attribution, harassment, discrimination, retaliation, payment disputes connected with editorial conduct, concealed sponsorship, pressure to breach standards or improper use of contributor identity. Purely contractual disputes may require a separate commercial or legal process, while related editorial concerns remain subject to review.

DeshiAI may summarize complaint activity through an Editorial Transparency Report, including complaints received, matters upheld, corrections, retractions, recurring concerns, policy changes and process improvements. Personal and confidential information will be protected.

No Retaliation

DeshiAI does not retaliate against readers, authors, sources, contributors, subjects, advertisers or researchers for submitting a good-faith complaint. A contributor should not lose fair future consideration merely for raising a genuine editorial standards concern. Knowingly false, abusive or manipulative complaints may be limited, but good-faith criticism of DeshiAI remains permitted.

Contact

Formal complaints and appeals may be sent to complaints@deshiai.in. Specific factual correction requests may be sent to corrections@deshiai.in. Formal legal notices may be sent to legal@deshiai.in.