Right of Reply

Named organisations covered on CLCI Hub may submit a response to specific characterisations on their profile. This page explains the process, the criteria we apply when deciding whether to publish a response, and how we handle legal threats.

Who can submit a response

Any organisation named in a CLCI Hub profile may submit a response. We define “the organisation” broadly: official representatives, public relations contacts, ordained leadership, legal counsel, and authorised spokespeople identified on the organisation's own publications are all welcome to engage.

Individuals named on a profile (e.g. a founder, a senior leader documented in court records) may submit responses about claims that relate specifically to them. Family members of named individuals may submit responses where the named individual is deceased or otherwise unavailable.

How to submit a response

Email the address listed at the bottom of this page with:

• The profile URL or slug your response concerns
• The specific claim or paragraph you wish to respond to (quote it)
• Your response in your own words (no length limit, but we will summarise rather than republish long submissions)
• Your role and authority to speak for the organisation
• Optional: any public-record source you wish us to cite alongside your response

You may submit anonymously if you are a member or former member of the organisation but not officially authorised to speak for it. We will publish such responses as “response from a current/former member” rather than as an official organisation response.

Criteria for publishing a response

We publish responses where:

• The response addresses a specific claim or characterisation in the profile.
• The response is in good faith and does not contain defamatory claims about identifiable third parties.
• The response does not require us to remove public-record material (court findings, government investigations, peer-reviewed academic work).
• The response is concise enough to be summarised in a few sentences, or the organisation is willing for us to summarise it.

Where we publish a response, it appears in a dedicated “Organisation response” section of the profile, clearly attributed and dated. We do not edit responses for content; we may edit for length and clarity with the respondent's permission.

Corrections vs disagreements

Some requests are corrections of factual error (“the founding date is 1967, not 1965”); these go through the Corrections process and will be acted on if supported by evidence.

Other requests are disagreements with an editorial characterisation (“you describe us as ‘high-control’ but we do not consider ourselves high-control”). For disagreements, we publish the organisation's position alongside our editorial assessment. We do not remove sourced editorial characterisations on the basis of organisational disagreement alone.

Abusive or legal-threat submissions

We treat the right-of-reply process as a good-faith editorial channel. We will not publish submissions that:

• Contain defamatory claims about identifiable third parties
• Threaten violence, harassment, or doxxing
• Demand suppression of public-record material
• Are sent solely as legal-pressure tactics rather than as editorial responses

We respond to legal correspondence through legal channels, not through the right-of-reply process. Receiving a legal-threat letter does not automatically result in profile removal or editorial change; we evaluate every claim on its evidentiary merits. We document legal-pressure attempts in our annual Transparency Report (forthcoming).

Transparency about responses

When we publish an organisation response, we record the date received and any editing applied. When we decline to publish a response, we note that a response was offered and declined, without revealing private correspondence content. These records appear in the profile's public changelog and in the annual transparency report.

Contact: corrections at clcihub dot com. See also Corrections · Editorial Policy · Legal Disclaimer