Fact-Checking Policy
Our advantage, used properly
Crypto journalism has one advantage no other beat enjoys: much of the subject matter is recorded on public ledgers that anyone can inspect. A claimed transfer either exists at a transaction hash or it does not. A treasury either holds the funds or it does not. CRYPTO PULZE treats that verifiability as an obligation. If a claim can be checked on-chain, we check it on-chain before publishing, and this page explains the rest of the process around that core.
The verification ladder
Every factual claim in a story is checked against the strongest available source, in this order:
- On-chain data. Transaction hashes, wallet balances, contract code and interactions, token supplies, and bridge flows, read directly from block explorers and node data. For claims about hacks, whale movements, mints, burns, and treasury changes, this is the ground truth.
- Primary written sources. Official project announcements and documentation, exchange status pages and statements, regulatory filings, court documents, audit reports, and post-mortems, taken from the source’s own verified channels.
- Named parties. Direct statements to us from people in a position to know, on the record wherever possible.
- Reputable data providers. Market data aggregators and analytics platforms for prices, volumes, and TVL, cross-checked against a second provider when a figure is central to the story, because providers disagree more often than readers assume.
- Secondary reporting. Other outlets’ journalism, used with attribution and only when we cannot reach the primary source ourselves, and never for the core claim of our own story.
Standing rules
- Screenshots are not evidence. Images of transactions, balances, or messages are trivially forged. We verify the underlying data at the source or we do not use the claim.
- Wallet attribution is stated with its confidence. Linking an address to an entity ranges from certain (self-disclosed, exchange-tagged) to inferential (clustering heuristics). Our articles say which it is, because “a wallet linked to X” has burned this industry’s readers too many times.
- Announcement accounts get authenticated. Before reporting a statement, we confirm the channel actually belongs to the project or person, since compromised accounts announcing fake partnerships and airdrops are a routine attack.
- Numbers get units and timestamps. A market cap, a TVL, a funding rate: each is cited with when we observed it, because in this market a number without a timestamp is already misinformation.
Rumors, leaks, and market chatter
Unverified claims that are themselves moving markets sometimes warrant coverage, but only framed as exactly what they are. We label rumor as rumor in the headline and body, report what is verified alongside what is not, and seek comment from the parties involved. What we never do is state a rumor as fact and quietly hope it lands, and we do not cover rumors whose only significance is the pump they might cause; that line is drawn in our Editorial Standards.
Before an article ships
The writer verifies claims while drafting. Before publication, a second team member reviews the piece against its sources: every hash resolves, every quote matches its origin, every number carries its timestamp, every attribution states its confidence. For fast-moving breaking news this review is compressed, not skipped, and anything that cannot be verified in time is either cut or explicitly labeled unverified.
When verification fails after the fact
If new evidence shows a published claim was wrong, the article is corrected visibly under our Corrections Policy, including the special class of on-chain misreadings we track there. Readers who spot a claim that fails against the data are our unpaid fact-checkers, and we mean that as a compliment: send the evidence to support@cryptopulze.com with the subject line CORRECTION and we will run it through this same process.
