Written from facts, not guesswork. Checked before you approve.

Hynca Media Desk keeps made-up facts out of the news on your site with a six-step process. Every piece is written from a fact sheet drawn from its source. A separate check then tests each claim in the piece before it goes to a person for approval.

The Desk set out the process in a guide, "How Hynca Media Desk writes from facts, not guesswork", published on 4 October 2026. The guide describes how the Desk already works; it doesn't announce a change. What follows takes the six steps in order and explains what each one means for the news on your site.

Why made-up facts are a risk to your site

Your readers trust what's on your site. When they see a figure, a date or a quote on your news page, they assume you stand behind it. Most never check. It's your name on the page, whoever wrote the words.

Hynca Media Desk puts the problem in one sentence: "AI writing tools make things up, and a made-up fact on a business website damages trust."

On a small business site, the news page speaks for the business. On a member organisation's site, members rely on it; on a client site an agency manages, it carries the client's name. Whichever applies to you, one test decides whether a claim belongs in a piece: can it be traced back to the source?

Where the facts come from

Step 1 is reading. The Desk reads the full source article. It respects each publisher's robots.txt, the file a website uses to say which pages automated tools may read. It also skips paywalled articles, so a story behind a subscription won't be used as a source.

Step 2 is the fact sheet. The Desk draws up a sheet containing only what the source states: the figures, the dates and who said each thing. That sheet is the boundary for everything after it. The writing in step 3 draws on the sheet alone, so a detail that isn't on it can't appear in the piece.

Take the source behind this guide as an example. Its fact sheet records the publication date, 4 October 2026, and the six steps. It records Hynca Media Desk as the one making each statement. It also records what the source leaves out. The guide doesn't say who approves each piece, which tools or AI models are used, or when the process was introduced. It gives no error rate and no count of how many pieces have been checked. You won't find any of those details here.

Sometimes there's no outside article to work from, and the piece starts from a brief instead. The brief then becomes the only source of facts. A brief with too little in it is stopped before writing begins, and the Desk won't stretch a thin brief into a full piece by adding detail of its own. The guide doesn't say where the line for "too little" sits. So the practical step is to write a brief that already holds what you want the piece to carry: the dates, the figures and the names your readers need. If a brief is stopped, add those and send it again.

How a piece is planned and written

Step 3 is planning and writing. The piece is planned around the question your readers will ask. It's then written in your site's voice.

Working from the sheet rules out more than you might expect. Outside figures are out, even when one would make a sentence feel more complete. So are assumed details, such as a place or a cause the source doesn't state. Names the source doesn't give are out too. If the source says "a spokesperson", the piece says a spokesperson. General knowledge that may have gone out of date, such as who currently holds a particular role, is also left out.

There's a cost. Some pieces will be shorter, or less detailed, than you'd like. We think that's the right trade. A gap your readers can see does far less harm than a confident sentence that turns out to be wrong.

What happens to a claim that can't be supported

Step 4 is the claims check, and it's the centre of the process. It runs separately from the writing. It compares every claim in the finished piece with the fact sheet, and with what your site says about itself. A claim the check can't support is narrowed or removed.

Those are two different outcomes.

Suppose a draft sentence said the Desk "has always" worked in six steps. The fact sheet supports the six steps but says nothing about when the process began. So the sentence keeps the six steps and loses "has always". The claim gets smaller and stays true to the source.

A sentence describing how often errors are caught would come out entirely, because the source gives no error rate. So would a sentence about how often claims end up narrowed or removed. The source doesn't say that either.

What the check never does is fill in. When a claim lacks support, it doesn't go looking for a figure or a detail to prop it up. That's the safeguard we'd point to first, because it covers the moment when invention is most tempting: a sentence that's nearly right and needs one more fact to stand up.

The comparison with your own site matters for a different reason. A news piece often links the story back to your services, events or members, and those lines are claims too. The Desk shouldn't describe your organisation in a way your own site doesn't.

Checking the writing, and crediting the source

Step 5 checks the writing itself. Each piece is checked for padding, stock phrases and length, then revised. This helps readability, and it helps accuracy as well. Padding is where vague statements tend to creep in, the kind that sound informed but can't be traced to anything. Cutting them leaves fewer sentences that need a source and don't have one.

Step 6 is the credit. The source is credited and linked in every piece. Your readers can see where each fact came from and read the original if they want more. The credit also makes clear you're reporting what someone else said. That's fair to the publisher and honest with your readers.

What you see before you approve

A person sees the fact sheet, the claims and the checks beside the piece before approving it. The guide doesn't say who that person is. If the approver is you, or someone in your team or at your agency, the evidence sits next to the words it supports, and a short routine makes the review quick:

1. Read the piece against the fact sheet. Every figure, date, name and quote in the piece should be on the sheet. If you find one that isn't, don't approve it.
2. Read the checks alongside the piece. Where a sentence looks thinner than you expected, read it again and make sure the piece still says what you'd want your readers to take from it.
3. Read any lines about your own organisation. Check they match how you describe yourself, especially anything about services, prices or events.
4. Confirm the source credit and link are in place.

If you have questions about how claims are checked, the contact and FAQ page is the place to ask.

If something isn't right, leave the piece unapproved. The decision stays with a person, and nothing is published by itself.