Knack Magazine (www.knack.be) is a publication of the media company Roularta Media Group, a Belgian listed multi-media group with over 1,300 employees and a total combined turnover of 300 million euros. The media company was established back in 1954. Some twenty years later the first issue of Knack Magazine appeared, in 1971.

Details on the company and its foundation are stated in the 'about' on the website of Roularta Media Group (https://www.roularta.be/en/about-roularta/our-company).

An overview of all the media products of Roularta Media Group can be found on the 'our brands' section on the website of the company. For more details on Knack Magazine in particular: https://www.roulartamedia.be/en/brands/magazines/knack.

Roularta is a legal Belgian company. The group operates in the France, the Netherlands, and Portugal in addition to its native Belgium

1. In the slipstream of media and fact-checking units abroad, Knack Magazine was the first outlet in Belgium to start a constant and regular fact-checking effort and a distinct fact-checking section to try and counterweight for (alleged) dis/misinformation the public is confronted with.

Knack Factcheck (https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/) has been a weekly section in our print and online publication for a decade now. The first Knack Factchecker appeared in 2012 (pdf attached).

Since May 2020 Knack is partnering with Facebook (Meta Inc.) through its Third-Party Fact-Checking Program. This resulted in an expansion of our fact-checking activities, i.e. more articles, online-only, approximately an extra twenty per month from April 2021 onwards.

More details on our partnership with Facebook in this news article: https://datanews.knack.be/ict/nieuws/knack-in-zee-met-facebook-voor-belgische-factchecking/article-news-1581563.html?_ga=2.241436354.1727262029.1585235634-948773422.1584621031

2. In total 7 people are – part-time – involved in the fact-checking operation of Knack Magazine: regular fact-checkers (Stefanie Van den Broeck, Brecht Castel, Karin Eeckhout, Lotte Lambrecht), fact-check coördination team (Jan Jagers, Gerry Meeuwssen), and editor-in-chief (Bert Bultinck). On top of our regular fact-checkers, we bow on a pool of stand-in fact-checkers when needed.

3. Knack Magazine is a news outlet under the umbrella of the media company Roularta Media Group. Its different activities can be found in the annual report (2020) here (Jaarverslag 2020, p. 6; p. 40 in pdf): https://www.roularta.be/sites/default/files/public/roularta/Roularta-op-de-beurs/jaarverslag/OB72928_JVS2020-NL_0_book.pdf

The core activity of Roularta Media Group (RMG) is spreading qualitative, relevant, and independent information. But as you can see RMG also runs events, like Trends Manager of the Year, and the Roularta Innovation Lab (Jaarverslag 2020, p. 18; p. 46 in pdf) to research new technologies, tools, and software.

As for the fact-checking unit of Knack Magazine, besides publishing fact checks we give interviews about fact-checking and mis/disinformation when asked for, as well for news outlets as for students and other academic research, and engage in building a network within as well as over national borders to try and speed up the battle against mis/disinformation.

4. In 2021 our fact-checking team and output have expanded. The main goals of our fact-checking unit for the coming year are (1) to further optimize and streamline our workflow; (2) to filter and counter false information out of Flemish/Belgian public debate as much as possible; (3) to shape our fact checks in line with current scientific findings and recommendations as much as possible; (4) to strengthen our international network (output example, see https://edmo.eu/2021/11/11/corona-sceptics-a-small-movement-trying-to-project-a-huge-shadow/); and (4) to strengthen deCheckers, the national fact-checking network nonprofit. Founded in July 2021, deCheckers is a collaboration between journalists and fact-checkers from Knack, public broadcaster VRT NWS, and Factcheck.Vlaanderen. deCheckers bundles fact checks in Dutch from different fact-checking outlets in one place for broader visibility and dissemination (website www.decheckers.be under construction dd 1/3/2022). deCheckers' social media manager manually tracks down mis/disinformation on social media, gently posts relevant fact checks in reply, and follows up the conversation. Via deCheckers - a form on its website as well as via the social media manager and tagging on social media - we install a new  and extra channel for incoming suggestions for a fact check. 

Applicant started to work with Facebook.  Facebook pays Knack per submitted fact check. Facebook doesn't allow fact checking of political statements, Knack does include checks of political statements on their own website. The other new activity is Decheckers.be which is a summary of the activities of Knack, VRT NWS and Factcheck Vlaanderen. 

Until May 2020 we published on average one fact check a week. Ever since our partnership with Facebook, that amount has risen to an extra ten to twenty per month as of February 2022.

Our fact checks are published and archived on the separate Knack Factcheck section (https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/).

The online and freely accessible archive goes back to September 2016.

See attached a spreadsheet with all fact checks that we published last year (February 2021 - February 2022).

We cover mis/disinformation that spreads in Flanders/Belgium / in the Dutch language. The topics we often deal with are health (e.g. coronavirus; and broader scope: well-being), climate change, or politics and policy issues. We also react to polarizing rumors that follow or precede news events, e.g. corona protests. 

Applicant supplied a spreadsheet with all articles from 2021 and 2022 till March. The spreadsheet doesn't clarify which articles are Facebook checks and which are not.

In each article itself, it is mentioned if it was a Facebook check, f.e. in  https://www.knack.be/factcheck/factcheck-nee-meer-cholesterol-is-niet-beter-voor-de-gezondheid

Due to the new collaboration with Facebook, we noticed more Facebook-related checks, such as if the login screen is from Facebook or not, https://www.knack.be/factcheck/factcheck-nee-je-must-have-vaccination-bewijs-to-login-to-facebook/. The mix of topics is still diverse. Fact checks are of general interest to everyone. To facilitate browsing on topic (health, politics, science, etc.) we kindly suggest to use some sort of tag/directory.

Roularta receives state subsidies for training, innovation and sustainability projects from both the Flemish and the Belgian government. These do not affect the editorial independence of Knack Magazine in any way. Background and more details on state subsidies for media companies in Flanders, Belgium, can be found in (1) an analysis in De Journalist by the Vlaamse Vereniging voor Journalisten (September 2021, see pdf attached); (2) the annual report of the Vlaamse Regulator voor de Media (VRM) on media concentration in Flanders (https://www.vlaamseregulatormedia.be/sites/default/files/mediaconcentratie_in_vlaanderen_2021_-_aanpassing_figuur_48_en_tabel_4.pdf); and (3) the website of the Flemish authorities (https://www.vlaanderen.be/cjm/nl/media/gesubsidieerde-en-erkende-organisaties).

Knack Magazine is a news outlet under the umbrella of the media company Roularta Media Group. As a recognized member of the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN), Knack now works with Meta to combat misinformation on Facebook and Instagram. This collaboration takes place for a fee but in editorial independence, which means that Knack has unilateral control over the selection of claims as well as over the effect and conclusion of the investigation." - according to https://www.knack.be/alles-wat-u-moet-weten-over-de-factcheck-van-knack/#financiering Applicant meets criteria. 

Roularta receives state subsidies for training, innovation and sustainability projects from both the Flemish and the Belgian government. These do not affect the editorial independence of Knack Magazine in any way. Background and more details on state subsidies for media companies in Flanders, Belgium, can be found in (1) an analysis in De Journalist by the Vlaamse Vereniging voor Journalisten (September 2021, see pdf attached); (2) the annual report of the Vlaamse Regulator voor de Media (VRM) on media concentration in Flanders (https://www.vlaamseregulatormedia.be/sites/default/files/mediaconcentratie_in_vlaanderen_2021_-_aanpassing_figuur_48_en_tabel_4.pdf); and (3) the website of the Flemish authorities (https://www.vlaanderen.be/cjm/nl/media/gesubsidieerde-en-erkende-organisaties).

Applicant complies to criteria.

We have selected the following fact checks to prove and illustrate our work:

(1) https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/factcheck-particulieren-geven-gemiddeld-meer-dan-18-000-euro-uit-aan-een-nieuwe-auto/article-longread-1803315.html

(2) https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/factcheck-nee-er-komen-geen-12-000-euromiljonairs-per-jaar-bij-in-ons-land/article-normal-1712475.html

(3) https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/factcheck-ja-europa-verbiedt-de-lidstaten-om-de-btw-op-stookolie-te-verlagen/article-longread-1830477.html - we publish fact checks about claims that prove to be true, too. This fact check was initiated by a question of our readers.

(4) https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/factcheck-nee-uitstoot-vlaamse-veestapel-is-niet-dezelfde-als-die-van-1000-gascentrales/article-analyse-1814035.html

(5) https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/factcheck-ja-onder-de-huidige-vlaamse-regering-werd-al-meer-dan-een-miljoen-nieuwe-bomen-geplant/article-longread-1789943.html

As for claims made by or related to politicians, these examples (1-5) illustrate that we do not concentrate our fact-checking on any one side of the ideological spectrum. We check outliers (1: Vlaams Belang, extreme right; 2: PvdA, extreme left) as well as rather mainstream politics (3: Open VLD, liberal; 4: Green Party; 5: N-VA, Flemish nationalist), and use the same standards and scrutiny regardless of who the claimant is.

(6) https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/factcheck-dat-13-procent-van-de-mannen-ooit-verkracht-werd-is-een-overschatting/article-longread-1745669.html - we dig and lean on original sources for our conclusions and we employ scientific research and expert explainers as a standard.

(7) https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/factcheck-nee-deze-trucks-rijden-niet-naar-een-biomassacentrale/article-longread-1745517.html - we use online tools to show that pictures and videos can be used out of context and/or be manipulated to create mis/disinformation.

(8) `https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/factcheck-ja-donkere-kledij-trekt-meer-muggen-aan/article-normal-1772139.html

(9) https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/factcheck-nee-een-coronavaccin-verkloot-je-dna-niet/article-longread-1712813.html

In (8) we assess a rather light-hearted claim in comparison to (9). We use the same high standards of – scientific – evidence regardless of the subject at hand.

In (9) we assess a claims related to covid-19, which has been the dominant theme of our work since the pandemic. 

(10) https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/factcheck-nee-het-world-economic-forum-wil-het-eigendomsrecht-niet-afschaffen/article-longread-1733599.html - we react to rumors that can spread hate and conspiracy theories.

One of the supplied links is not working: https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factchecker/factcheck-een-hamburger-kost-eigenlijk-200-euro/article-longread-1518035.html should have been https://www.knack.be/factcheck/factcheck-een-hamburger-kost-eigenlijk-200-euro/ We didn't notice any major hyperfocus on special interest groups. The links to publications and the explanations match the non-partisanship criteria.

Here’s the link: https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/alles-wat-u-moet-weten-over-de-factcheck-van-knack/article-longread-1437751.html

Scroll down to subtitle “Claimselectie”. Underneath is explained how we select claims, how we ensure balance, and how we consider the reach and importance of the claims we select to check.

As a rule, our fact-checkers together with the team leads and editor-in-chief decide which claims are scrutinized. We thereby follow classic news selection criteria such as topicality, proximity, social relevance, reach, interest, and curiosity of the reader. We intend to present a broad variety of subjects (see criteria 2.1, example 8), and steer clear from any bias as to the political affiliations of politicians discussed. 

The editor of Factcheck chooses the claim to be reviewed in consultation with the sub-editor and editor-in-chief.

In the selection of claims, they follow classic news selection criteria such as topicality, proximity, social relevance, interest in and interest of the reader, and variety of topics.  Knack also clearly defines what they don't check: opinions  ('That party's policy leads to a cooler society'), or prediction of the future, because the future cannot be verified. Exceptions to this premise are claims based on scientific research and / or forecasts.

A list of all sources of article was provided by the applicant at the end of each article. This procedure has now changed (2022).  The links are inside the text and the source section is used to mention possible calls and mail conversations often with a direct link to the contributors social media, see https://www.knack.be/factcheck/factcheck-het-handschrift-vertelt-iets-over-de-persoonlijkheid/

No single party or issue was hyper-emphasized. We noticed, compared to 2020, the mix of topics is more balanced. 

Here’s the link: https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/alles-wat-u-moet-weten-over-de-factcheck-van-knack/article-longread-1437751.html

Scroll down to the subtitle “Onafhankelijkheid”.

As stated there, Knack Factcheck is an autonomous and independent form of journalism.

'Our ambition is to present truthful facts and reasonably defendable insights, without the influence of any ideological agenda or bias. To ensure unbiased and neutral treatment of allegations, the journalists behind Knack Factcheck are not politically active. They participate in the political process as voters because they have that responsibility as a citizen, but they avoid the public expression of any political opinion whatsoever and try to avoid any appearance of bias.

We avoid and prohibit everything that might compromise the Knack Factcheck and our ability to work independently and honestly.'

The text, in Dutch, is clearly visible on https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/alles-wat-u-moet-weten-over-de-factcheck-van-knack/article-longread-1437751.html 

Note to whom it concerns. As of January 2022, we have decided to no longer enlist all hyperlinks underneath our fact checks because those sources are already clickable in the article itself. We have done so to save time, speed up the publication process, and thereby follow the standard of many if not most of our colleagues abroad. For our readers, all the important sources used are still transparent and directly available. 

Applicant uses the Sources section now to explain to the reader which sources, besides the linked sources, were used. Example:

https://www.knack.be/factcheck/factcheck-niet-bewezen-dat-een-vlaamse-leerling-5000-toetsen-aflegt/

- Telephone conversation, mail and sms traffic with Kim De Witte (PVDA), 10-14 June 2022

- Telephone conversation and mail traffic with Ludo Heylen (CEGO), 13-14 June 2022

- Telephone conversation and mail traffic with Jan Vanhoof (UA), 10-14 June 2022

- Telephone conversation and mail traffic with Martin Valcke (UGent), 10-14 June 2022

 The applicant goes the extra mile by archiving sometimes dubious Facebook posts so readers can still find the primary source. For that, they use archive services like archive.today. 

References to online sources are often provided to support claims that are dissected in a clear, logical manner

Source material is heavily based on web sources. Sometimes people behind the claims a posting after the publication. Applicants still show the original posting via archive services. Suggestion: tell the reader if and when the original source is deleted.

As mentioned above (criteria 1.1 and 1.2, §1), Knack Factcheck (https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/) is the distinct section and unit of Knack Magazine. Knack Magazine (www.knack.be) is a news outlet of the media company Roularta Media Group, a Belgian-listed multi-media group with over 1,300 employees and a total combined turnover of 300 million euros. Details on the company and its foundation are stated in the 'about' on the website of Roularta Media Group (https://www.roularta.be/en/about-roularta/our-company). As stated under criterion 1.5, Roularta Media Group receives state subsidies for training, innovation and sustainability projects from both the Flemish and the Belgian government. These do not affect the editorial independence of Knack Magazine in any way as explained under criterion 1.6.

There is now a clear link to Roularta on knack.be, as requested. See upload.

Details about the ownership of Roularta Media Group can be found in its most recent annual report (2020) here: https://www.roularta.be/sites/default/files/public/roularta/Roularta-op-de-beurs/jaarverslag/OB72928_JVS2020-NL_0_book.pdf

Ownership information is given.

As made clear in the ‘about’ section (https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/alles-wat-u-moet-weten-over-de-factcheck-van-knack/article-longread-1437751.html) the editorial control of Knack Factcheck is a shared responsibility exercised by fact-checkers, the fact check coördination team, and, ultimately, the editor-in-chief of Knack Magazine.

Scroll down to the subtitle “De mensen achter Factcheck”’. As stated under criterion 1.2, journalists of Knack Magazine are, together with colleagues from other media companies, driving forces behind deCheckers.be, a collaboration that bundles fact checks in Dutch from different fact-checking outlets in one place for broader visibility and dissemination.

The role of Knack Magazine is limited. Knack Magazine shares its fact checks with deCheckers and its database, as that is a crucial part of creating this single point of contact for Dutch-speaking Belgians regarding disinformation and debunks. On the incoming side, fact-checkers of Knack Magazine receive suggestions for a fact check through deCheckers’ tip line. The website of deCheckers is edited by a freelance journalist, who is paid by the not-for-profit deCheckers, and who formally operates independently from Knack Magazine. She also manages the tip line of deCheckers. Other people behind the not-for-profit organization deCheckers are, among others, freelance journalist Jan Jagers (managing director), and Knack Magazine’s editor-in-chief Bert Bultinck (board member). 

Applicant complies to criteria. 

The professional biographies of those who play a significant part in the output of Knack Factcheck can be found in the ‘about section’: https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/alles-wat-u-moet-weten-over-de-factcheck-van-knack/article-longread-1437751.html

Scroll down to subtitle “De mensen achter Factcheck”. 

Online bios for some fact-checking organizations are small or incomplete. It's commendable that Knack includes bios of people who don't do fact checks anymore, but whose work is still available online. During our assessment the names of the authors were sometimes not clickable, sometimes they were, probably a technical glitch. 

We encourage users to communicate with us in the ‘about’ section (https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/alles-wat-u-moet-weten-over-de-factcheck-van-knack/article-longread-1437751.html)

Scroll down to subtitle “Hoe zetten we eventuele fouten recht” and “Suggesties”.

Readers are actively invited to send their suggestions, complaints, compliments, comments and questions to the editors of Knack Factcheck via e-mail. The address factcheck@knack.be is mentioned at the bottom of every fact check and on the 'about' page of Knack Factcheck. 

As stated above (criteria 1.2) we have installed a new channel for incoming suggestions for a fact check via deCheckers, a cross-border collaboration between journalists from different news organizations. Suggestions entering through that channel are monitored by the social media manager of deCheckers, and passed on to the fact-checkers of all participating partners. As a founding member of deCheckers, and as all members do, Knack then independently decides to follow up on such suggestions or not, thereby using its own criteria for claim selection. 

The organization can be contacted by email and through social media. Additionally, we noticed that individual contributors engage with the public on Facebook and Twitter.

We explain our methodology in the ‘about section’: https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factchecker/alles-wat-u-moet-weten-over-de-factchecker-van-knack/article-longread-1437751.html

We select claims based upon reach, importance, and common news criteria (see above, criteria 2.2).

Scroll down to subtitle "Standaardprocedure". In more detail there is stated and explained that we (1) contact the claimant where possible to seek evidence; (2) use all different journalistic means and sources available to assess the claims’ truthfulness as thoroughly and transparently as possible; (3) conclude on a five-point scale (true, rather true, no evidence, rather untrue, untrue); and (4) write and publish a fact check story that reflects the research process as well as where it finally comes down to. 

We have added a new - fifth - category "no evidence" from November 16, 2021, onwards. That must be taken into account when reading the conclusions of fact checks that were published before that date. 

One of the most precise explanations we saw about the methodology of fact checking.

Facebook checks sometimes include debunking of outrageous claims, but seem to be based on impact. 

The applicant meets the criteria; sometimes even the Google searches are displayed. This makes the process of fact checking very transparent. We do suggest that you study the Google operators (https://www.knack.be/factcheck/factcheck-nee-deze-duitse-boeren-protesteren-niet-tegen-de-coronamaatregelen/) - an individual who lives in Germany probably would not refer to his own country Germany in a news article about Germany. For a different approach, please compare both screenshots. (4260203.png, yours with 2022-07-05_12-05-45.jpg)

The applicant assesses the merits of the claims based on the evidence regardless of who made them. Our favorite thing of Sources:  you can see which people were contacted to make the story.

Applicant specialize in current affairs, healthcare, and Facebook claims. When evidence cannot be found, most articles explain why.

As stated above (criteria 4.5) we have installed a new channel for incoming suggestions for a fact check via deCheckers, a cross-border collaboration between journalists from different news organizations.

Users are actively encouraged to join. It says "Error noticed or more news?" under each article.

An e-mail address dedicated to feedback is provided. Also each article has a box with:

Strong statement, strange stats or ditto fact seen in the news? Send your question with exact source quotation of the quote to factchecker@knack.be

In the 'about' section of Knack Factcheck we unfold our policy to address corrections. https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factchecker/alles-wat-u-moet-weten-over-de-factchecker-van-knack/article-longread-1437751.html

Scroll down to subtitle “Hoe zetten we eventuele fouten recht”. This is the outline of our corrections and complaints policy:

Fact-checkers also make mistakes. Knack applies the principle that any errors are acknowledged equitably and corrected as quickly as possible in all due transparency.

As stated above (criteria 4.5), complaints and comments can be sent by e-mail to the editors of Knack Factcheck via factcheck@knack.be.

Messages will always be read and handled by the author of the fact check after consulting with the fact check coördination team, and, if necessary, the editor-in-chief.

If the supplied argument and/or the additional information is such that the fact check has to be revised and corrected, we immediately revise the text online. In case of major errors, this revision is mentioned explicitly, so that it is clear to readers what went wrong. If it concerns a fact check that also appeared in the paper magazine, we publish a correction in the appropriate section in the next issue.

If the argument provided and/or the additional information is not crucial to the evaluation in the fact check, but nonetheless relevant or useful, we will provide this information as an update at the bottom of the article.

In both cases - both the crucial and the other corrections and adjustments, the message 'updated on' appears at the top of the article with the hour and the date of the update.

What the update was and why it was conducted, is stated at the bottom of the article.

A corrections or complaints policy is easily accessible and visible on the organization's website.

A clear definition of what it does and does not cover is provided, along with how major mistakes, especially those requiring revision of a fact check, are handled.

We received complaints and correction requests through the factcheck@knack.be address. We replied to all the requests that were not mere insults, and in case more information was required we asked further questions for clarification. The editorial staff examined the arguments in the complaints and correction requests. If the arguments warranted a correction, we modified our fact checks accordingly. We also indicated in the online version of the article that we had done so, why, and when.

In the first example, we had made a factual mistake that however did not affect the conclusion. Not Vancouver, but Victoria is the capital of British Columbia in Canada, a reader notified. We rectified the article and indicated that we had done so (cf attachment 1 below). 

The second example of how we have handled complaints in the previous year starts with a letter we had received from a law firm on behalf of Auto55 (cf attachment 2 below). We scrutinized the request and the arguments on which it was based. As they were not convincing, we did not correct the fact check. However, we did publish a right of reply to the fact check (https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/factcheck-nee-70-kilometer-per-uur-is-niet-beter-voor-het-milieu-dan-30-kilometer-per-uur/article-longread-1781003.html). Underneath, we provided the reasoning and arguments behind our decision.   

 Knack acknowledges errors equitably and corrects them as quickly as possible in full transparency

We inform users here: https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factchecker/alles-wat-u-moet-weten-over-de-factchecker-van-knack/article-longread-1437751.html

Scroll down to subtitle “Hoe werken we?”.

The IFCN Signatory Logo is shown, and there is a direct hyperlink to Code of Principles. Also  applicant allows complaints: 

"If you feel that we are failing in our commitment to comply with the Code, please contact the IFCN here."

The parent media corrections policy is on the website of Knack.be, behind a link near to - underneath - the contact button at the bottom of this page (https://www.knack.be/nieuws/) because we believe this is the most convenient place for our public to find it. (Readers who have a complaint or request for correction will look for correction policy and contact details on the website of Knack Magazine, instead of on the overarching website of Roularta Media Group)

Here’s the link to the correction policy: https://www.knack.be/info/corrections-policy-knack/article-service-1650645.html

Please find below an example of a correction in the print magazine: the case of pediatric immunologist Isabelle Meyts, who was interviewed in Knack in January 2022. She was cited on the cover (“Five children have died from Covid-19, that’s five too many”). A reader, anonymously on Twitter, wondered where this figure came from as it was not reported by Sciensano, the federal Belgian institute that monitors data about Covid-19.

https://twitter.com/ZusterO/status/1485527966486564864

This comment led to a fact check in which we scrutinized the original and full claim from the interview that had been published in our magazine ("In Belgium, five children under the age of 12 have also died from corona").

Although for privacy reasons Sciensano does normally not report details on children under 12, the government institute confirmed the following: in Belgium, two children under the age of 5 and two 12-year-olds had died as a result of Covid-19. Thus not five, but two deaths in the under-12 age group.

We published the fact check: https://www.knack.be/nieuws/factcheck/factcheck-nee-in-belgie-zijn-geen-vijf-kinderen-jonger-dan-twaalf-jaar-aan-corona-overleden/article-longread-1833375.html

We apologized and corrected the mistake, in the magazine and in the online version of the interview.

https://www.knack.be/nieuws/wetenschap/kinderimmunoloog-isabelle-meyts-er-zijn-vijf-kinderen-gestorven-aan-corona-dat-zijn-er-vijf-te-veel/article-longread-1823789.html

A transparent corrections policy is adhered to. Some complaints may justify no response.