We Ask Tough Questions. We Also Correct Our Mistakes.

Policy Change Notice

As the Hoosier Enquirer grows, readers deserve to know the standards behind what we publish—and what happens when we get something wrong.

I

NDIANA — September 2026 — The Hoosier Enquirer has grown rapidly by doing something fairly simple: publishing stories and opinions about Indiana that people want to read, discuss, debate and sometimes argue about.

Thousands of readers now encounter HE reporting and commentary. With that growth comes greater responsibility.

So we are putting something in writing that readers, public officials, lawyers, businesses and anyone appearing in our coverage should understand: HE has adopted an Editorial Standards, Opinion, Corrections and Retractions Policy.

It isn't a promise that everyone will like what we publish. Quite the opposite.

HE intends to continue asking uncomfortable questions, criticizing government institutions, examining public records, publishing strong opinions and giving writers room to reach conclusions that may irritate people on both sides of Indiana's political and cultural divides.

That's journalism.

But there is an equally important distinction: being provocative isn't permission to be factually careless.

Facts Are Facts. Opinions Are Opinions.

Readers should be able to understand what they're reading.

A news report attempts to tell readers what happened. Analysis tries to explain what events mean. Opinion tells readers what a writer thinks about those events.

HE will continue publishing all three.

Calling something an opinion, however, doesn't magically make every sentence inside it an opinion. If we say somebody was convicted of a crime, that's a factual assertion. If we say a politician's proposal is ridiculous, that's an opinion.

We intend to understand the difference.

Allegations Aren't Convictions

This distinction becomes particularly important in crime, court and government reporting.

Someone who has been arrested has not necessarily been convicted. Someone sued in court has not necessarily done what the plaintiff alleges. An ethics complaint isn't an ethics violation simply because someone filed it.

HE will attempt to describe these matters accurately.

We can report what a lawsuit alleges. We can examine the evidence. We can criticize the people involved. Our opinion writers can even tell readers whom they find persuasive.

But an allegation should not quietly become an established fact simply because it makes a better headline.

People We Criticize Can Answer

When HE is preparing to publish a substantial new factual accusation about an identifiable person, our policy generally favors giving that person a reasonable opportunity to respond when circumstances permit.

That isn't a right to stop the story.

Public officials don't get editorial vetoes. Lawyers don't get them. Corporations don't get them. Political parties don't get them.

Neither does someone who sends an angry email threatening litigation.

But hearing the other side can uncover information that makes a story more accurate—and sometimes more interesting.

And Sometimes We Will Be Wrong

Every serious publication eventually gets something wrong. The question is what happens next. Our answer is simple: Correct it.

If HE determines that a material factual statement is wrong, we intend to correct the record promptly and transparently. Readers should be told what was wrong and what the correct information is.

When the problem is more serious—when the central factual assertion of an article itself proves materially false—a retraction may be necessary.

Indiana law actually recognizes the importance of retractions in newspaper libel cases. Indiana Code §34-15-4 establishes procedures involving notice and timely retractions and, under qualifying circumstances, can limit the damages recoverable against a newspaper that published an erroneous statement in good faith and then issued a full and fair retraction.

For traditional daily newspapers, the statute specifies five days after the mistake or misapprehension is brought to the publisher's attention; for weekly newspapers, ten days. It also requires qualifying retractions to receive prominence comparable to the original material.

Because HE is an internet publication rather than a traditional ink-and-paper daily, the precise application of that statute to modern digital journalism can present legal questions.

Our policy therefore takes the safer and simpler approach:When we're materially wrong, we shouldn't wait around to find out how long the law gives us. We should investigate and correct the error promptly.

Corrections Aren't Weakness

There is a strange tendency in modern media to treat admitting an error as surrender.

We disagree.

A news organization that never publishes corrections probably isn't a news organization that never makes mistakes. It may simply be one that doesn't acknowledge them.

HE would rather have an accurate archive.

That means insignificant typographical mistakes may simply be repaired. Material factual errors should carry a correction explaining what changed. And a seriously erroneous central assertion may warrant a formal retraction.

What we will not do is retract accurate reporting simply because somebody doesn't like it.

There is a difference between being wrong and being unpopular.

Strong Opinions Aren't Going Anywhere

Readers shouldn't interpret this new policy as HE becoming timid.

Indiana's courts have long recognized substantial protection for discussion of matters of public concern. The Indiana Supreme Court's 1999 Journal-Gazette Co. v. Bandido's decision is an important example of the balance between protecting reputation and protecting vigorous reporting on matters the public has a legitimate interest in knowing about.

HE intends to use that freedom.

We will criticize Republicans. We will criticize Democrats. We present stories written on controversial issues and often very important issues, and truth is our goal.

We will scrutinize judges, lawyers, prosecutors, universities, corporations and government agencies when the facts justify scrutiny.

Our opinion pages will contain opinions. Some will make readers cheer. Others will make readers furious. That's okay. No ever learns much from those they agree with. We want to change lives and improve them as well.

The Standard Is Evidence

HE is growing, and growth means more scrutiny. We welcome it. Thank you for your readership, support, and donations. Donations are tax deductible where subscriptions are not. Donate today on the HE Home Page.

The same principle we apply to the institutions we cover should apply to us: show your work, stand behind what you can prove and correct what you cannot.

If HE reports something accurately, we will not retract it merely because someone threatens us.

If HE expresses an opinion based upon accurately presented facts, disagreement is part of the conversation.

If HE makes a material factual mistake, we will correct it.

And if HE publishes something materially false that requires a retraction, we will say so.

That's not merely lawsuit prevention.

That's what readers should expect from a news organization that intends to be around for a long time.

HERE IS THE FORMAL POLICY THAT HE OPERATES BY:

HOOSIER ENQUIRER EDITORIAL STANDARDS, OPINION, CORRECTIONS AND RETRACTIONS POLICY

Effective: September 2026

Our Purpose

The Hoosier Enquirer exists to report, investigate, analyze and comment upon matters affecting Indiana and its people.

HE believes vigorous journalism necessarily includes asking uncomfortable questions, criticizing powerful institutions, examining government officials and publishing opinions with which some readers—or the people discussed—may strongly disagree.

Freedom of the press carries responsibilities as well as rights. HE therefore adopts the following standards governing news reporting, analysis, opinion, corrections and retractions.

1. Facts and Opinions Are Different

HE will distinguish among news reporting, analysis and opinion.

A news article should present material factual assertions as accurately and fairly as reasonably possible based upon the information available at publication.

An opinion article may criticize, praise, question, ridicule, advocate, analyze or draw conclusions from disclosed or accurately reported facts.

Labeling an article “Opinion,” however, does not transform a false assertion of fact into protected opinion. HE writers and editors should therefore take particular care when an opinion column contains factual allegations concerning identifiable people or organizations.

2. Facts Should Have a Reasonable Factual Foundation

Before publishing a material factual assertion that could seriously damage someone's reputation, HE should determine what evidence supports it.

Whenever reasonably available, HE should favor primary sources, including:

court records and judicial opinions; government documents; public records; official statistics; recordings; photographs and video; direct interviews; corporate or organizational records; and other independently verifiable evidence.

Secondary reporting may also be used, particularly from established news organizations, but attribution should be provided when appropriate.

The fact that another publication reported an allegation does not automatically establish that the allegation is true.

3. Allegations Are Allegations

An arrest is not a conviction.

A lawsuit is not proof that the allegations in the complaint are true.

An ethics complaint is not a finding of misconduct.

An investigation does not establish guilt.

When reporting disputed allegations, HE should use language accurately describing their procedural status, such as “alleged,” “according to the complaint,” “police said,” “prosecutors contend,” or similar attribution when appropriate.

4. Serious Accusations Receive Additional Review

Articles accusing an identifiable person of criminal conduct, fraud, professional misconduct, corruption, sexual misconduct or similarly serious wrongdoing should receive additional editorial scrutiny before publication.

Editors should ask:

What exactly are we alleging?

What evidence supports it?

Is the evidence authentic and reliable?

Are we reporting an allegation or stating something as an established fact?

Does the headline accurately reflect the article?

Have important contrary facts been omitted?

Has the person involved already denied or explained the allegation?

Could the same point be stated more accurately without weakening the journalism?

5. Opportunity to Respond

When HE plans to publish a significant new factual accusation about an identifiable person or organization, it should ordinarily make a reasonable effort to obtain that person's response when circumstances permit.

The person does not possess a veto over publication.

Failure or refusal to respond does not prevent HE from publishing adequately supported reporting.

HE may state that the person declined to comment, did not respond before publication, or could not reasonably be reached.

6. Headlines Must Be Accurate

A headline should fairly reflect the substance of the article.

A provocative headline is acceptable.

A materially false or misleading factual headline is not.

Editors should be particularly careful because many readers encounter a headline without reading the entire story.

7. Opinion and Commentary

HE welcomes strong opinions.

Writers may draw conclusions from facts, criticize public officials, question government decisions, advocate policy changes and express political, cultural and social viewpoints.

Opinion pieces should be clearly identified when their nature would otherwise be ambiguous.

Opinions should not knowingly rely upon materially false factual premises.

HE does not require political neutrality from an opinion writer. It requires intellectual honesty about the factual foundation upon which the opinion rests.

8. Public Officials and Public Institutions

Government officials, courts, prosecutors, legislators, political candidates, universities, public agencies and other institutions exercising public authority are legitimate subjects of vigorous scrutiny.

HE will not withdraw accurate reporting or sincerely held commentary merely because it is embarrassing, unpopular, harsh or upsetting.

Criticism is not defamation merely because its subject dislikes it.

But criticism should not be based upon facts HE knows are false.

9. Anonymous Sources

Anonymous sources may sometimes be necessary, particularly when information involves government, employment, whistleblowing or fear of retaliation.

HE should know the identity of an anonymous source whenever practicable.

Editors should consider the source's basis of knowledge, credibility and possible motives.

Serious accusations resting entirely upon an unverified anonymous source require exceptional caution.

10. Documents, Photographs, Audio, Video and AI

Digital material can be altered, edited, generated or taken out of context.

HE should therefore consider provenance, context and authenticity when a material factual conclusion depends substantially upon photographs, recordings, screenshots, video or AI-generated or AI-assisted material.

AI may assist research, organization, transcription, editing and analysis, but it should not be treated as an independent factual source.

Material facts generated through AI should be verified against reliable sources before publication.

11. Corrections

HE wants its published record to be accurate.

When HE learns that a published article contains a material factual error, it should investigate promptly.

If an error is confirmed, HE should correct it promptly and transparently.

A correction should ordinarily identify:

What HE originally reported.What was incorrect.What the correct information is.When the correction was made.

Minor spelling, grammar, formatting or typographical errors that do not materially change meaning may be corrected without a formal correction notice.

Material factual changes should ordinarily be disclosed to readers.

12. Retractions

A correction fixes a portion of an otherwise supportable article.

A retraction is appropriate when the central factual assertion of an article is materially false or cannot responsibly remain published as originally presented.

HE will consider requests for retraction promptly.

A person requesting a correction or retraction should identify the exact statement claimed to be false and, whenever possible, provide documentation demonstrating the correct facts.

HE will not retract truthful reporting merely because someone threatens litigation, disagrees with an opinion or dislikes the coverage.

When a retraction is warranted, HE will endeavor to publish a full and fair retraction promptly and with prominence reasonably comparable to the original publication, consistent with applicable Indiana law.

13. Correction and Retraction Format

When appropriate, HE may use language substantially similar to the following:

CORRECTION — [DATE]: An earlier version of this article incorrectly reported ________. The correct information is ________. The article has been corrected. HE regrets the error.

For a retraction:

RETRACTION — [DATE]: The Hoosier Enquirer previously reported that ________. After reviewing additional information, HE has determined that this factual statement was incorrect and retracts it. The correct information is ________. HE regrets the error.

The precise language should reflect the circumstances of each case.

14. Preserve the Record

When a significant correction or retraction is made, HE should preserve internally the original article, corrected version, relevant correspondence and supporting source material.

HE should ordinarily correct the existing article rather than silently erase the historical record.

Removing an article entirely may be appropriate in exceptional circumstances, but deletion should not substitute for a correction when maintaining an accurate public record better serves readers.

15. Complaints and Legal Demands

Any written demand alleging defamation, libel, invasion of privacy or another substantial legal violation should be preserved and immediately referred to HE's publisher/editor and, when appropriate, legal counsel.

No writer should alter evidence, destroy correspondence or delete underlying source material after receiving notice of a dispute or threatened litigation.

HE will evaluate complaints on their merits.

A threat to sue will not determine editorial truth.

Evidence will.

16. Our Commitment

HE will make mistakes. Every news organization does.

The measure of responsible journalism is not pretending errors never occur. It is taking reasonable steps to prevent them, correcting material errors when discovered, distinguishing allegations from established facts and refusing to knowingly publish false information.

The Hoosier Enquirer will continue to investigate, question, criticize, analyze and express opinions about matters important to Indiana.

We will also correct ourselves when the facts require it.

Truth deserves both courage and humility.