We outline answers in the "About us" section of the site here: https://www.lakmusz.hu/rolunk/ This section is linked from the homepage. Some information is provided in the "Masthead" section also linked from the homepage here: https://www.lakmusz.hu/impresszum/ We provide detailed information about the site, newsroom, staff, ownership and funding and some narrative information about who we are, what we do and principles we are trying to uphold.

Applicant is a distinct team within a publishing company (Magyar Jeti Zrt.). Ownership data is transparent and available on its website.

 1. When and why was your fact-checking operation started?

We launched the website, lakmusz.hu on the 11th of January 2022 and began operations (prep) 3 month before. Magyar Jeti Zrt. is a medium sized publisher and we did some occasional factchecking work on our larger news site, 444.hu, but we felt that we needed to dedicate more resources and create a separate platform for anti-disinfo work as things in the Hungarian media environment deteriorated. In 2019 we partnered with AFP to apply for a grant by the European Commission which was aimed at supporting media organizations to do more fact-checking work, we got the grant and was able to launch the site as the result. 

2. How many people work or volunteer in the organization and what are their roles?

We currently have 4 people dedicated to Lakmusz full-time, Blanka Zoldi is chief editor, Eszter Neuberger and Nora Dioszegi and Szilard Teczar are journalists and Szilvi Nemet is our research associate. Im (Peter Erdelyi) the director of Lakmusz, but I also run our bigger news site, 444.hu and im Head of Strategy at our media house. A number of other people work at the publisher our one of our other outlets, but provide some support for Lakmusz, like Zsolt Sebesi, who is a project manager, Marcell Ardai, who is community manager, Tamas Botos, who is our camera operator, Aniko Bukta and Bence Tamas Gaspar, who are graphic designers. A number of media researchers from the ELTE University publish research and essays on Lakmusz, but they are not part of the newsroom. This inculdes Ferenc Hammer, Peter Bajomi-Lazar and Gabor Polyak. The Hungarian fact-checker of AFP, Ede Zaborszky also publish some articles on Lakmusz. Some 444 staff, including Andras Kiraly and Mark Herczeg also contributed to some of the content.

All dedicated full-time staff and content contributors are displayed under the Masthead section linked above.

3. What different activities does your organization carry out?

Lakmusz's main focus is content creation. Its mostly digital content on the site itself. We have done a number of live-streams with various disinfo and other experts on Facebook, we created podcasts of these discussions and published articles about them as well. We had one live event.

4. What are the goals of your fact-checking operation over the coming year?

We will increase the volume of fact-checks not at least because we are going to be the Hungary Hub of EDMO (partially funded by the European Commission) and the project got additional funding for +30 month from January with and extended staff (to be hired). We are planning content aimed at children and the elderly, to submit regular Freedom of Information request to obtain public data to base our content on, to start a volunteer community and the publish a print magazin on disinformation to be distributed in schools across the country.

Yes, organizational structure and publishing practice also suggests that applicant is a distinct team inside a general interest publishing company.

You can find all our published articles here: https://www.lakmusz.hu/section/cikkek/ (Press the "+" bottom to see more)

You can also see all our articles with links and some other information here:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1fQd4V-_1I3Jb8BK1b7GBWZJOxDcicU3etDsmyCOVmHo/edit#gid=628615618

Applicant has published 76 fact-checking articles and other 31 related media materials on its website during the past 6 months.

After reviewing a bigger sample of articles my impression is that applicant's practices satisfy the standards set out in the guidelines.

Note:

• Political and economic topics typically focus on government's claims, however, my impression is that this is not political bias: the government dominates the Hungarian public discourse so much and the opposition is so powerless that this imbalance reflects reality and may be considered as part of editorial freedom. When applicant analyzes claims by the opposition, it follows the same thorough method as it does with topics related to the government.

Lakmusz currently receives grant funding from the European Commission under this project: EU grants for small-scale online media: supporting high-quality news products and tackling fake news - https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/funding/eu-grants-small-scale-online-media-supporting-high-quality-news-products-and-tackling-fake-news

From the 1st of January 2023 Lakmusz will receive further grant funding from the European Commission under this project: DIGITAL-2021-TRUST-01-EDMO

Applicant describes its main sources of income and also states one grant received from the European Commission here. This About page is easily reachable from its front page.

We disclose the Commission grant (along with other funding sources) under the "about us" section of the site, here: https://www.lakmusz.hu/rolunk/

We disclose the Commission grant (along with other funding sources) under the "about us" section of the site, here: https://www.lakmusz.hu/rolunk/

UPDATE 2023 0214

We amended the "About us" page and clarified the points on editorial independence, and that we only accept funding from entities that will respect our full editorial independence. 

Applicant declares one such grant from the European Commission and also describes transparently who are the beneficial owners of its parent publishing company.

Editorial independence, code of conduct and corrections policy are all mentioned in applicant's About page and on its rather short methodological page on its website. These sites state that applicant is independent from its founder and funders, however, does not describe how this is secured. I suggest that applicant gives a more detailed description of how this independence is secured either through organizational, structural safeguards or if such guarantees already exist applicant should share them with its audience.

Applicant declares one such grant from the European Commission and also describes transparently who are the beneficial owners of its parent publishing company.

Editorial independence, code of conduct and corrections policy are all mentioned in applicant's About page and on its rather short methodological page on its website. These sites state that applicant is independent from its founder and funders, however, does not describe how this is secured. I suggest that applicant gives a more detailed description of how this independence is secured either through organizational, structural safeguards or if such guarantees already exist applicant should share them with its audience.

Leading Hungarian politicians tend to organize annual "State of the Union" type speeches where they evaluate the past year, in early 2022 we factchecked both the speech of PM Viktor Orban, and his opposition challanger Peter Marki-Zay:

PM Orban: https://www.lakmusz.hu/egymillioval-tobb-dolgozo-brutalis-export-eroszakos-migransok-orban-evertekelojenek-6-allitasat-ellenoriztuk/

PM Orban: https://www.lakmusz.hu/a-kisbabaknak-kedvuk-tamadt-megszuletni-tobbnyire-jogosan-buszkelkedik-orban-a-javulo-demografiai-adatokkal/

Peter Marki-Zay: https://www.lakmusz.hu/az-elszurt-jarvanykezelestol-az-angol-kiralynonel-is-gazdagabb-gazszereloig-marki-zay-orszagertekelojenek-7-allitasat-ellenoriztuk/

These 3 articles show how we apply to the same standards to everyone regardless of political orientation and we fact-check relevant statements from across the political spectrum.

While we dedicated a lot of resources countering Russian disinformation which is unfortunately part of the mainstream in the Hungarian context, we also fact-check communication by Ukrainian sources: https://www.lakmusz.hu/mitikus-hosok-es-tulzo-statisztikak-hogy-igazodjunk-el-a-haborus-hirek-kozt-mikozben-mindket-fel-dezinformal/

March 15th is a large national holiday in Hungary when major political forces tend to organize large rallies and make claims about the size of the crowds. We factchecked claims about the two largest rallies using the same methodolgy: https://www.lakmusz.hu/bekemenet-es-ellenzeki-tuntetes-hol-hanyan-voltak/

The government recently loosened regulation for the annual asset-declaration of MPs which was hugely controversial, especially because of Hungary's issues with systemic corruption. Government politicians made claims about modelling the new, looser legislation on European standards, we fact-checked there claims and found them to be mostly accurate: https://www.lakmusz.hu/valoban-az-europai-parlament-laza-vagyonnyilatkozati-szabalyzatat-masolja-kocsis-mate-torvenyjavaslata/

During the general election campaign, the main opposition candidate, Peter Marki-Zay made some statements about about PM Orban recieving medical care in a private clinic in Graz. This fueled allegations that have been around for decades (outside of mainstream media) about Orban's trips to a psychiatric hospital in Graz, basically implying the PM has serious mental health issues. We fact-checked these claims, and looked at the so called "evidence": https://www.lakmusz.hu/orban-allitolagos-grazi-utjai/

Our first ever fact-check was looking at government claims about sex-change surgeries and other procedures for minors in Western-Europe: https://www.lakmusz.hu/felrevezeto-statisztikakkal-harcol-a-nematalakito-mutetek-orulete-ellen-a-fidesz/

A GP practice refused to vaccinate 5-11 year olds in Budapest. Anti-vaxx groups hailed them as heroes, we fact-chekced if they refused to take part in the vaccination efforts because they were skeptical of the effects of the shots: https://www.lakmusz.hu/nem-oltasellenessegbol-hanem-az-elegtelen-korulmenyek-miatt-nem-oltanak-gyerekeket-egy-budapesti-rendeloben/?lang=hu

We fact-checked claims by the far-right Our Homeland (Mi Hazánk) party about the WHO trying to exert control over governments in cases of public health emergencies: https://www.lakmusz.hu/nincs-teriteken-olyan-javaslat-amely-teljhatalmat-adna-a-who-nak-jarvanyhelyzetben/

After the review of several fact-checking materials, my conclusion is that applicant generally follows an unbiased approach and applies the same rules and scrutiny to all fact-checking materials.

Note:

• the biggest group of fact-checks concern claims of the government or media outlets echoing government punchlines. This shows a slight bias against the government in choosing material to fact-check, however, given that in Hungary the government dominates the public discourse so much that this can be considered as part of editorial freedom
• Topics related to the war in Ukraine usually counter Russian disinformation which is not the most balanced approach but can be justified in a country where the Russian narrative is dominant. In my view, a representative example for this problem is this recent article covering the missile strikes in Poland killing two people. Applicant correctly and thoroughly describes how different media companies handled this breaking news, the article's conclusion is that there was a lot of uncertainty, the story makes it obvious that most media companies (including applicant's parent company) made mistakes during their coverage, still, in its short summary applicant highlights how differently the Hungarian state news agency covered the incident. The conclusion of the article seems to be that the state agency's approach was among the few objective ones still, the framing of it seems to send the message that it simply followed Russian government communication panels.

Here is our "Methods" page: https://www.lakmusz.hu/modszertan/

There is more on this on the "About us page": https://www.lakmusz.hu/rolunk/

The sites linked by the applicant set out the basic criteria of what can be fact-checked and what is not. These are very basic rules that satisfy the spirit of the guidelines.

Note:

• This criteria is a correct explanation of why a certain topic can be subject of fact-checking but does not explain how applicant decides whether a certain claim falls under this criteria.

Could not find any examples for this practice, however, applicant quotes sources with detailed background information about them.

After reviewing a bigger sample of articles, my conclusion is that applicant's approach, generally speaking, is fair and balanced.

Notes: 

• the biggest group of fact-checks concern claims of the government or media outlets echoing government punchlines. This shows a slight bias against the government in choosing material to fact-check, however, given that in Hungary the government dominates the public discourse so much this can be considered as part of editorial freedom
• Topics related to the war in Ukraine usually counter Russian disinformation which is not the most balanced approach but can be justified in a country where the Russian narrative is dominant
• On the website of applicant's parent company, 444.hu, factual stories and opinions are not always clearly separated and titles can be very sharp in tone and imbalanced. Since this is the biggest distribution channel for applicant's stories, this can influence the judgement of objectivity of applicant's content even if in itself, applicant follows a rather balanced and fair approach.

Here is the link to our "About us" page: https://www.lakmusz.hu/rolunk/

The linked site does highlight the requirement of non-partisanship, however, it does not explain how it ensures this, instead, the applicant refers to its methodology page which is a rather short description stating very basic requirements of transparency and non-partisanship without any methods to ensure these values.

This satisfies the basics of the guidelines but a better approach would be to give a more detailed description of how these values are forced and how their implementation is secured.

The applicant's practice satisfies the values set out in the guidelines based on the review of several dozens of fact-checking material on applicant's website.

The applicant's practice satisfies the values set out in the guidelines based on the review of several dozens of fact-checking material on applicant's website.

Generally speaking, applicant's approach is fair and satisfies the rules set out in the guidelines.

Note:

• In some cases, for example this story in abortion stats, this one on missile strikes in Poland, this one on inflation, simply counter a public statement without trying to understand why it was made by the original source or without confronting the original source with the mistake it has made. In these articles, applicant cites several sources and data that counters the original claims but does not try to find facts that support the original claim. This is an inconsistency in applicant's practice since in other cases applicant does try to reach those whose claims are scrutinized and try to confront them with their own findings.

Could not find any example for this practice after reviewing a bigger sample of fact-checking material.

We are the dedicated fact-checking site of our media house. You can read more about the ownership status on out "About us" page https://www.lakmusz.hu/rolunk/ and on the Masthead page: https://www.lakmusz.hu/impresszum/

We are the dedicated fact-checking site of our media house. You can read more about the ownership status on out "About us" page https://www.lakmusz.hu/rolunk/ and on the Masthead page: https://www.lakmusz.hu/impresszum/ 

UPDATE 20230214

We will be able to provide the exact quantity and ratio of the income received from our parent company and from the European Commission after the first financial report of the HDMO project is finalized and accepted by the European Commission by the middle of this year, but we cannot unilaterally declare funding amounts and ratios (beyond the estimates we already put forward) before the European Commission accepts the final accounting of our first year.

As for income received from our parent company: we mention in the "About us" section that we only collaborate with organisations, and we only accept funds from organizations, which acknowledges and respects our principle of editorial independence. This is also true for our parent company, and for funds received from our parent company. We made the point on funding and independence more explicit in the "About us" section.

As for the 4 smaller funds: we clearly state in the "About us" section that these grants all together ("összesen") do not reach 20K euros.

The applicant states its biggest sources of funding on the linked website, mentioning European Commission funds and smaller grants received to support the project. The first financial report of applicant's parent company since the launch of Lakmusz is due at 31st May 2023 so it is impossible to verify right now how transparent this report will be in respect of applicant's operations.

Applicant mentions its bigger revenue sources on the linked site, however, some details are unclear and in my opinion require more explanation to fully satisfy the criteria set out in the guidelines:

• Applicant mentions that a big part of its funding comes from its parent company, however, neither the quantity nor the ratio within the total operating cost is clear
• It is unclear how applicant secures that funding received from its parent company satisfies the rules set out in IFCN guidelines. There is no reason to assume that those funds are in any way compromised but the code of ethics and statements of funding does not include any rules or restrictions that secure the independence and transparency of those funds
• Applicant mention 4 smaller funds and their scale ('not reaching 20k euros') but it is unclear if these grants are separately or all together reach that amount

These inconsistencies can be dissolved by updating the linked page with more details where it is needed and with a description regarding how the independence and transparency of fundings received from the parent company is secured.

Clarifications on the 'About' page answer concern #2 mentioned during the assessment.

In case of #3 applicant is right.

In case of #1 (more details required of funds received for the sake of transparency) the applicant's explanation is reasonable, I suggest that during the next reassessment the assessor scrutinizes this point again.

https://www.lakmusz.hu/rolunk/

Yes, the applicant is a separate unit within a bigger news organization as the about page suggests. The page linked by the applicant lists main sources of income and ownership.

You can see our organizational structure on our Masthead page https://www.lakmusz.hu/impresszum/ and you can see in the BIOs at the bottom of the page who is responsible for what in terms of content production.

Yes, the linked page satisfies the criteria set out in the guidelines.

You can find BIOs on the Masthead page: https://www.lakmusz.hu/impresszum/

Yes, the linked page satisfies the criteria set out in the guidelines.

You can find a call to action on the "Methods" page: https://www.lakmusz.hu/modszertan/ its linked in the header of the HP and every page. We also issue calls to action in certain articles and we also promote this on social media and our bi-weekly newsletter. We also indicate on articles if they were based on tips from readers.

Article with CTA:

https://www.lakmusz.hu/nagyot-tuloz-orban-viktor-grafikonja-a-munkavallalok-szamanak-novekedeserol/?lang=hu

Articles based on user tips with acknowledgement and CTA:

https://www.lakmusz.hu/evek-ota-terjedo-alhir-magyar-forditasa-uzeni-hamisan-hogy-az-aszpirin-gyogyitja-a-covidot/

https://www.lakmusz.hu/elromlott-egy-huto-egy-becsi-lidlben-a-magyar-kozmedia-mar-elelmiszerhianyrol-kezdett-spekulalni/

Articles based on user tips with acknowledgement

https://www.lakmusz.hu/ez-mar-fasizmus-magyarul-is-terjed-egy-nemet-orosz-blogger-videoja-arrol-hogyan-utaljak-az-oroszokat-nemetorszagban/

https://www.lakmusz.hu/tovabbra-is-terjednek-a-covid-oltassal-kapcsolatos-hamis-hirek-mikozben-a-virus-magyar-aldozatainak-szama-atlepte-a-45-ezret/

You can find a call to action on the "Methods" page: https://www.lakmusz.hu/modszertan/ its linked in the header of the HP and every page. We also issue calls to action in certain articles and we also promote this on social media and our bi-weekly newsletter. We also indicate on articles if they were based on tips from readers.

Article with CTA:

https://www.lakmusz.hu/nagyot-tuloz-orban-viktor-grafikonja-a-munkavallalok-szamanak-novekedeserol/?lang=hu

Articles based on user tips with acknowledgement and CTA:

https://www.lakmusz.hu/evek-ota-terjedo-alhir-magyar-forditasa-uzeni-hamisan-hogy-az-aszpirin-gyogyitja-a-covidot/

https://www.lakmusz.hu/elromlott-egy-huto-egy-becsi-lidlben-a-magyar-kozmedia-mar-elelmiszerhianyrol-kezdett-spekulalni/

Articles based on user tips with acknowledgement

https://www.lakmusz.hu/ez-mar-fasizmus-magyarul-is-terjed-egy-nemet-orosz-blogger-videoja-arrol-hogyan-utaljak-az-oroszokat-nemetorszagban/

https://www.lakmusz.hu/tovabbra-is-terjednek-a-covid-oltassal-kapcsolatos-hamis-hirek-mikozben-a-virus-magyar-aldozatainak-szama-atlepte-a-45-ezret/

UPDATE 20230214

We created a dedicated "Contact" page and put it in the main menu on the HP. https://www.lakmusz.hu/kapcsolat/

There is an email address to contact the editorial team, they also receive comments and messages through Facebook. This makes the application compliant, however, the easiest way to contact the editors would be to publish this address on the front page.

Changes make the application compliant.

See out Methods page: https://www.lakmusz.hu/modszertan/

Yes, the applicant has a methodology page even if it is a rather short description.

Yes, applicant's practice satisfies the rules set out in the guidelines.

Most claims checked by the applicant are major policy issues or are related to topics that are part of the public discourse. In some cases, however, applicant does not explain the thought process behind why a certain claim was chosen to be fact-checked.

Evidence countering a claim under scrutiny is usually in abundance, precisely sourced and described in a balanced manner.

Applicant's handling the fact-checked claims is usually fair and satisfy the guidelines. Applicant tries to find facts that support the original claim and/or reaches out to the original source to have a better understanding of why that claim was made (for example here and here). In the minority of the cases, however, the applicant simply counters the original claim without trying to better understand why it was made or to confront the original source with the error it made (for example here an here). The first approach prevails in the vast majority of fact-checks but it would be better to set this as a norm in each and every piece published by the applicant.

Applicant's overall approach satisfies the criteria stated in the guidelines of IFCN.

Applicant's handling the fact-checked claims is usually fair and satisfy the guidelines. Applicant tries to find facts that support the original claim and/or reaches out to the original source to have a better understanding of why that claim was made (for example here and here). In the minority of the cases, however, the applicant simply counters the original claim without trying to better understand why it was made or to confront the original source with the error it made (for example here an here). The first approach prevails in the vast majority of fact-checks but it would be better to set this as a norm in each and every piece published by the applicant.

See our Methods page: https://www.lakmusz.hu/modszertan/

See our Methods page: https://www.lakmusz.hu/modszertan/

UPDATE 20230214

We created a dedicated "Contact" page and put it in the main menu on the HP. https://www.lakmusz.hu/kapcsolat/

Applicant does encourage readers to send in claims for fact-checking, the contact point is the fact-checking team's email address. There's also a distinct page where they share this email address.

On the other hand, the address to contact the editors is rather invisible: it is mentioned at the bottom of applicant's methodology page (where I do not think many readers get to), and I could not find this contact point on applicant's main page or in fact-checks. It is also difficult to find contact to fact-checkers that would make it much more effective, usable and more in line with the guidelines.

The description of what can readers expect to be fact-checked is rather short but in my opinion gives a correct and understandable explanation of what will be and what will not be scrutinized.

The update makes the application compliant

See our methods page: https://www.lakmusz.hu/modszertan/ 
Also, under Hungarian law the courts can mandate media outlets to issue corrections, we obviously comply with all relevant regulations.

See our methods page: https://www.lakmusz.hu/modszertan/ 
Also, under Hungarian law the courts can mandate media outlets to issue corrections, we obviously comply with all relevant regulations.

UPDATE 20230214

We updated the methodology section (https://www.lakmusz.hu/modszertan/) extensively to provide a more transparent and defined policy for corrections beyond what is legally required and was already in place. We created a special tag for pieces of content we modified after publishing and linket the tag page in the Methodology section, so all amendments can be tracked. We also made a public commitment to publish new posts if we have to issue a correction for any article published previously. (We haven't had to issue any correction so far).

Mi történik, ha hibázunk?

Cikkeink megírása során a lehető legnagyobb gondossággal járunk el, azonban előfordulhat, hogy hibázunk. A hibajelzéseket és egyéb megjegyzéseket a szerk@lakmusz.hu címre várjuk.

A szerkesztőség a hibajelzést a lehető legrövidebb időn belül megvizsgálja, a kérdéses cikk szerkesztője dönt arról, hogy a beérkező jelzés alapján a cikk módosítása szükséges-e. Amennyiben egy cikket utólag javítunk, azt transzparens módon jelezzük (ez alól csak az elütések javítása képez kivételt, ezeknek a javítását nem jelöltjük külön).

Ha a cikk lényegi állításait nem befolyásoló hibáról van szó, azt a cikk szövegében és a cikkünk végén tüntetjük fel, jelölve a cikk módosításának pontos időpontját. Amennyiben a cikk lényegi állításait befolyásoló (és különösképp az állításra adott értékelésünket módosító) hibáról van szó, akkor ezt külön bejegyzésben jelezzük azokon a fórumukon is, ahol az eredeti cikket közzétettük.

A megjelenés után módosított cikkeinket "módosítások" taggel látjuk el, és ezen a linken érhetők el: www.lakmusz.hu/tag/modositasok/

Emellett a magyar jogszabályoknak megfelelően lehetőség van sajtóhelyreigazítást kérni. Amennyiben bíróság sajtóhelyreigazításra kötelez minket, azt az ítéletnek megfelelően közölni fogjuk, illetve "módosítások" és "helyreigazítások" taggel látjuk el az eredeti cikket. A Lakmusz fennállása óta még egyszer sem kötelezték helyreigazítás közlésére.

The website linked by the applicant is a rather short description of how corrections are handled, provides an email address where errors can be reported. Based on this description, applicant's approach seems to be correct, however, this is not a policy, does not explain the command line through which and the time frame within which errors are handled.

Also, I could not find any corrections on applicant's website so far, however, there is no separate page where these corrections would be collected. On applicant's parent website, 444, it is very difficult to find corrections concerning its own content. The corrections page linked by the applicant under point 6.5 is not highlighted on its front page, code of principles or main menu and if I type 'correction' in the search field, it brings me to only a label page that collects corrections but this shows also results that concern correction published by other media outlets.

Great improvement in corrections policy.

UPDATE 20230214

We updated the methodology section (https://www.lakmusz.hu/modszertan/) extensively to provide a more transparent and defined policy for corrections beyond what is legally required and was already in place. See more above on 6.1.

There's no policy published but and there is not a central page that collect these errors and corrections. The examples provided by the applicant and other similar cases found during the assessment are all minor mistakes and in my opinion it is part of applicant's editorial independence to decide whether these should be separately collected and published. Without a clear policy in place, it is impossible to judge how applicant weighs these corrections. A clear policy on this would make the application compliant.

No formal (legally binding) corrections requests were made since our launch.

We received one legal request to remove personally identifiable information about an individual related to this article https://www.lakmusz.hu/salgotarjanbol-erositi-fel-orban-es-putyin-hangjat-egy-klikkvadasz-hirhalozat/ which is about a network of pages spreading Russian disinformation. We did not comply with the request, as we believe it is in the public interest to uncover who is behind these pages and are willing to defend our position in court.

We updated a number of articles after receiving feedback from the audience, you can see examples here:

https://www.lakmusz.hu/riaszto-gyerekhalalozasi-adatokkal-kelt-oltasellenes-hangulatot-duro-dora/ - You can see the update on the bottom with the exact time and date and content of the correction

https://www.lakmusz.hu/nem-ukran-neonaci-hanem-egy-magyar-skinhead-basszusgitaros-pozolt-a-horvat-tengerparton/ - Two updates at the end.

https://www.lakmusz.hu/mi-lesz-most-az-erdokkel/ - One update at the end.

No formal (legally binding) corrections requests were made since our launch.

We received one legal request to remove personally identifiable information about an individual related to this article https://www.lakmusz.hu/salgotarjanbol-erositi-fel-orban-es-putyin-hangjat-egy-klikkvadasz-hirhalozat/ which is about a network of pages spreading Russian disinformation. We did not comply with the request, as we believe it is in the public interest to uncover who is behind these pages and are willing to defend our position in court.

We updated a number of articles after receiving feedback from the audience, you can see examples here:

https://www.lakmusz.hu/riaszto-gyerekhalalozasi-adatokkal-kelt-oltasellenes-hangulatot-duro-dora/ - You can see the update on the bottom with the exact time and date and content of the correction

https://www.lakmusz.hu/nem-ukran-neonaci-hanem-egy-magyar-skinhead-basszusgitaros-pozolt-a-horvat-tengerparton/ - Two updates at the end.

https://www.lakmusz.hu/mi-lesz-most-az-erdokkel/ - One update at the end.

UPDATE 20230214

We updated the methodology section (https://www.lakmusz.hu/modszertan/) extensively to provide a more transparent and defined policy for corrections beyond what is legally required and was already in place. See more above on 6.1.

Applicant's practice to update articles or correct factual and wording errors is transparent and easy to understand (it highlights both the error and the correction), and it is in line with the short code of ethics published by the applicant.

However, there's no policy published and there is not a central page that collects these errors and corrections. The examples provided by the applicant and other similar cases found during the assessment are all minor mistakes and in my opinion it is part of applicant's editorial independence to decide whether these should be separately collected and published. On the other hand, without a clear policy statement in place, it is impossible to judge how applicant weighs these corrections and it is difficult to find these corrections. Also, by the time these corrections are most readers have probably already read the stories and without a central page most corrections can remain unnoticed.

Applicant's practice to update articles or correct factual and wording errors is transparent and easy to understand (it highlights both the error and the correction), and it is in line with the short code of ethics published by the applicant.

Correction's policy has been updated after the assessment and now it satisfies the requirements.

We are not an existing signatory.

Applicant is not yet a signatory.

Hungarian publishers do not individual have corrections policies as corrections are legal issues under Hungarian law and adjudicated by the court system. All Hungarian publishers are legally required to adhere to the relevant regulations (see the code here: https://net.jogtar.hu/jogszabaly?docid=a1000104.tv )

Here is a link to all the corrections 444 (the large news site of our publishers) issues since 2013: https://444.hu/category/helyreigazitas

(These correction were all displayed on the HP at the time of their publishing. Some of these are results of litigations, but more often we publish them after the request was made even before the courts intervein if we believe the request has merit. The requests are evaluated by senior newsroom leadership and the management board: chief editor, executive editor, director, in-house counsel, CEO. The format is determined by law.)

Hungarian publishers do not individual have corrections policies as corrections are legal issues under Hungarian law and adjudicated by the court system. All Hungarian publishers are legally required to adhere to the relevant regulations (see the code here: https://net.jogtar.hu/jogszabaly?docid=a1000104.tv )

Here is a link to all the corrections 444 (the large news site of our publishers) issues since 2013: https://444.hu/category/helyreigazitas

(These correction were all displayed on the HP at the time of their publishing. Some of these are results of litigations, but more often we publish them after the request was made even before the courts intervein if we believe the request has merit. The requests are evaluated by senior newsroom leadership and the management board: chief editor, executive editor, director, in-house counsel, CEO. The format is determined by law.)

UPDATE 20230214

444.hu, the big news website of our publisher is not only fully compliant with all relevant legislation, but also has a updates and corrections policy/practice that is more progressive than the strict Hungarian law and the standards of our Hungaria media market. You can find all corrections typing "correction" (helyreigaztás) in the site search field and we have a dedicated tag page as indicated above. 444 is a large, mainstream new site, a trusted independent voice in the difficult Hungarian media space. No other large HUN new site has corrections policy IFCN requires, and the HUN legal system make some of these policies less relevant than in the US. This a lot stricter and more difficult environment.

Lakmusz.hu is looking for IFCN verification NOT 444.hu. The two outlets have separate newsrooms, journalists and editors. They have different profiles and different policies. In our view, it would be very problematic to change any policy or practice of the 444 newsroom because of Lakmusz's IFCN verification especially since 444 has good practices in this regard..

Lakmusz.hu is more than happy to comply with all IFCN requirements, and we feel like we do, fully with the recent amendments.

I could not find any corrections published by the applicant, in this respect the application is compliant.

However, the page linked by the applicant to its parent website's correction is not a fully transparent solution. The corrections page linked by the applicant is not highlighted on its front page, code of principles or main menu and if I type 'correction' in the search field, it brings me to only a label page that collects corrections but this shows also results that concern correction published by other media outlets.

It is impossible to know whether applicant's corrections would be treated in the same manner but I suggest that applicant set up a page for corrections and publishes it on its front page and code of ethics in a more visible way than its parent company does. If that page is empty so far that is even better and proves the correctness and fairness of the applicant's working methods.

However the requirement focuses on the correction policy of applicant's parent company and I uphold my former observations about that, updates in applicant's correction policy since the first assessment, in my view, satisfy IFCN guidelines.