Newsroom accountability
Corrections
We correct errors of fact promptly. Clarifications are issued when wording could reasonably mislead even if technically accurate. Silent polish of typos does not belong here; material changes do.
Every article page shows a Trust strip with verified date, primary-source count, and links to methodology and this log. Inline corrections also appear on the affected article.
What changed
Changed the comment deadline from 12 December to 14 December 2026, the date in the published notice (91 FR 64840, 13 October 2026). Added the Federal Register citation and an update box. The same date was corrected in the 12 October brief and on the watchlist.
Why
We calculated 12 December as 60 days after the scheduled publication date. The published notice’s DATES line gives 14 December.
What changed
Added a 13 October update on the 11 October statement by seven senators that Russian diesel imports conflict with the Ending Importation of Russian Oil Act (Public Law 117-109), with the Act’s termination conditions, and noted OFAC had posted no change to General License 135. Added both sources.
Why
New on-record development after our 12 October update; not a correction of earlier text.
What changed
Added a 12 October update citing the Kremlin’s 9 October statement that Russia confirmed its “willingness to supply oil and petroleum products to the US market and global markets,” and noting the 11 October “energy ceasefire” announcement had no Kremlin confirmation as of 12 October. Reworded the refusal line: we no longer say only press reports support a Russian supply commitment, but we still refuse specific volumes as fact.
Why
Our 10 October piece relied on OFAC documents and press reports. The Kremlin’s own statement was not in it, and a later check found it on kremlin.ru.
What changed
Replaced the line saying we had not found a federal statement on the opinion. Environment Minister Julie Dabrusin’s office told The Canadian Press on 9 October that the government is reviewing the decision and considering next steps. Added an 11 October update and the source.
Why
The statement was given to The Canadian Press on release day and was missed in our 10 October search, which checked government news pages only.
What changed
Added a 7 October update. The C-39 piece, and the calendar section of the 6 October diesel-motion piece, said no government bill would be called on 6 October. Journals No. 146 show C-39 second-reading debate resumed that evening, after Private Members’ Business, with no vote.
Why
Both lines relied on the morning Order Paper for an opposition day. The House’s extended sitting reached Government Orders later in the evening.
What changed
Added a 7 October update with Élections Québec’s figures after the official addition of the votes: seats unchanged; turnout 66.92% (was 66.89% preliminary); Vachon margin 10 (was 14); Saint-Henri–Sainte-Anne 275 (was 39); Maurice-Richard 309 (was 307); Montarville 336 (was 341). Preliminary figures in the original text are kept and labelled as such.
Why
The article was built on preliminary results and said totals could change; the official addition changed several riding margins and party vote totals slightly.
What changed
Bottom line no longer says the West Coast Oil Pipeline listing decision is pending. It now notes the pipeline was added to Schedule 1 of the Building Canada Act by OIC PC 2026-0925 on 1 October 2026, and that this is a listing, not a CER certificate.
Why
The C-39 piece was written before the 1 October listing and was not refreshed when the separate pipeline article was updated. Found during the 5 October House-return update.
What changed
Clarified that the Oct. 1 nationwide trucker diesel strike claim remains unverified as a coordinated national action; local or sectoral complaints about diesel costs are not the same as a confirmed strike date.
Why
Social posts blurred cost-of-living frustration with an organized walkout. Readers asked whether any Canadian association had filed notice — none had, on the record we could verify.
What changed
Tightened Budget 2025 deficit language to distinguish the ~$78.3B projected shortfall (as reported) from the separate PBO critique of capital-investment labelling (~$94B definitional gap).
Why
Early drafts risked reading as one combined dollar figure. The deficit projection and the PBO capital rebuke are related accountability points but different numbers.
Spot an error? Email corrections@thedailyteabag.com. See also how we verify.