Corrections and Retractions

SCCG Management publishes analysis for the gaming industry — for operators, suppliers, regulators and tribal nations. Much of what we publish is about named companies and named people, and some of it is about people who are the subject of enforcement, litigation or dispute. Getting it wrong has a cost for them, not only for us.

This page says what we do when we get something wrong, and how to tell us.

Tell us

Email [email protected] with the article URL and what you believe is wrong. You do not need to be the subject of the article.

We aim to acknowledge within one business day and to resolve within three. Where a claim about a named person or company is disputed and we cannot quickly establish which version is right, we will add a note to the article saying so while we check, rather than leave it standing unqualified.

What we do about it

We use four responses, and we choose the smallest one that fixes the problem.

1. Silent fix — changes that cannot alter meaning. Spelling, punctuation, a broken link, a formatting error. No notice. This category is deliberately narrow: if a change could alter how any sentence reads, it is a correction and it gets a notice. Quietly editing a factual error out of an article is not a courtesy, it is the thing this policy exists to prevent.

2. Correction. A fact was wrong: a figure, a date, a name, a title, a jurisdiction, an attribution. We fix the text and add a dated correction notice at the foot of the article saying what was wrong and what it now says. The notice stays permanently. We do not quietly edit a factual error out of an article.

3. Clarification. The facts were right but the framing was misleading — wrong emphasis, a headline the article did not support, a characterisation stronger than our source justified. We amend and add a dated note.

4. Retraction. The article should not have been published: its central claim is wrong or unsupportable. We remove it and replace it with a standing notice at the same URL explaining that it was retracted and why. The URL keeps working. We do not make a retracted article vanish, because a reader who followed a link to it is entitled to find out what happened to it.

Where the notice appears

Three cases, and which one applies depends on what we did about the error:

We amended the article — a dated footnote at the end, setting out what

the article originally said and how it was changed.

We have not amended it (because the article is a record of what was

published, or because the fix is still being established) — the correction goes immediately under the headline.

The error was in the headline, the summary or the “SCCG Take”, or the

article was withdrawn — a standalone correction, not only a note on the article, because those are the parts most likely to have been read on their own or forwarded onward.

A correction is always labelled a correction. We do not describe one as an update, a clarification, a fix or a minor edit when what we mean is that we got a fact wrong.

If we sent it to you

Our articles feed daily and weekly newsletters. If a corrected or retracted article was in a newsletter, the correction is carried in the next edition of that same newsletter. A correction that reaches only the website does not reach the people who actually read the piece.

already had to learn this lesson once — see CLAUDE.md §7b: eleven articles pulled between 07-30 and 08-02 were still queued to be mailed, and Telegram announcements still pointed at them. A corrections process that does not clear the distribution path repeats that.)*

Unpublishing

We do not delete articles on request. Removing accurate reporting because its subject would prefer it gone is not a correction, and a publication that does it cannot be relied on by anyone else.

We will remove or amend where the material is wrong, where it is unlawful, where publication was itself the error, or where continued publication would cause disproportionate harm to a private individual.

Even then, the page does not disappear. A withdrawn article keeps its address and carries a notice explaining that it was withdrawn and why. A link that simply stops working tells a reader nothing, and it removes the record of our having been wrong along with the error itself.

Post, the Guardian, Poynter and ONA all say the same thing, and JTI CWA 17493 §14.2 requires the correction at “the same URL”. It is also the opposite of what services/content/retraction.py and docs/TAKEDOWN-PROCEDURE.md currently do: they verify a 410 Gone. Changing that is sign-off item §9.K. Note the SmartSite and Cloudflare complications in CLAUDE.md §7b — a Cloudflare rule covering the URL returns 403 and would mask the notice too.)*

Named people

Where we have published something adverse about a named living person and it turns out to be wrong, the correction is not optional and is not deferred. It goes up as soon as we know, at the top of the article, and it is carried in the newsletter that ran it. Where we can, we tell the person directly.

What this policy does not cover

Disagreement with our analysis is not a correction. SCCG publishes opinion — clearly marked as ours, in the closing section and the “SCCG Take” — and we will not amend an opinion because a subject disputes it. We will correct a fact that opinion rests on, and if the fact goes, so does the opinion.

If you think our analysis is wrong rather than our facts, write to us and say so. We would rather publish the argument than pretend it was not made.