Fact-Checking Policy

1. Core principle

Every factual claim published on EverydayNaira must be grounded in a real, identifiable, and credible source. We do not publish facts we cannot verify. We do not guess at charges, invent policy details, or rely on rumour. If we cannot responsibly support a claim, we do not make it.

This standard applies to every content type on the site — articles, guides, explainers, comparison pages, tool descriptions, and scenario examples. The type of content does not change the requirement for accuracy.

Our commitment

We prioritise accuracy over speed and depth over volume. A smaller number of well-verified pages serves our readers better than a larger number of loosely sourced ones.

2. Source hierarchy

We use the following source hierarchy for all factual content, in order of preference:

Tier 1 — Primary and official sources

Used first, always

Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), NIBSS, NDIC, SEC Nigeria, National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), FCCPC, NCC where relevant. Official bank and fintech websites, fee schedules, help centres, product terms and conditions, regulatory circulars, and official annual or statistical reports. Used for: fees, regulations, product features, account rules, institutional data, policy definitions, and process explanations.

Tier 2 — Strong research and institutional sources

Used for broader context and data

EFInA, World Bank, IMF, audited company reports, verified survey datasets, recognised development research, and credible academic studies. Used for: financial inclusion trends, market context, consumer behaviour patterns, sector insights, and broad data framing.

Tier 3 — Reputable secondary sources

Used to supplement, never as sole support

Major business publications, well-edited national newspapers, and traceable expert commentary. Used to add context, recent developments, or interpretation when primary sources have not yet published on the matter. Never used as the sole support for a sensitive factual claim when a primary source exists or could be found.

Sources we do not use as primary evidence

Anonymous blogs, SEO aggregator sites, unattributed social media posts, WhatsApp forwards, forum threads, unverified X or TikTok content, and AI-generated summaries without independent source verification. These may help surface leads, but they do not qualify as evidence for published claims.

3. Matching claims to sources

Different types of claims require different source types. We apply the following matching rules:

Fees and charges

Must be sourced from official bank or fintech fee pages, official pricing schedules, product terms, or regulatory guidance. We do not estimate or infer fees from secondary reporting when official documentation is available.

Payment system and transaction data

Sourced from NIBSS, CBN, or official annual and statistical reports. We do not report transaction volumes or values from unofficial compilations.

Financial inclusion and savings trends

Sourced from EFInA, NBS, World Bank, and verified survey reports. We distinguish national data from survey sample data and avoid overstating the representativeness of findings.

Product features and account conditions

Sourced from official product pages, help centres, terms and conditions, and official support documentation. Where a provider's documentation is unclear or contradictory, we note the ambiguity rather than assume.

Fraud and scam guidance

Sourced from official CBN and EFCC alerts, bank security guidance, consumer protection notices, and public warnings from trusted institutions. We do not republish unverified scam reports.

4. Verification process

Before a factual claim is published, we apply the following checks:

• Is the source identified? Can it be traced by the reader?
• Is the source primary, strong secondary, or weak? Is there a better source available?
• Is the source current enough for the type of claim being made?
• Could the fact have changed since the source was published?
• Is the claim phrased in a way that accurately reflects what the source actually says?
• Is the claim broader than the evidence supports?
• For important claims, has the information been verified through at least two credible sources where possible?
• Have we distinguished what the source says from what we are inferring?

5. Time-sensitive information

Banking fees, transfer charges, loan terms, product features, interest rates, regulatory limits, and policy details change regularly. We treat all of these as time-sensitive by default.

When publishing content that includes time-sensitive facts, we:

• Use the most current reliable source available at the time of writing.
• Avoid language that implies permanence — for example, "as of [month/year]" rather than "the fee is always".
• Direct readers to the provider's official page or the relevant regulator to confirm current details.
• Include a product-related caution disclaimer on pages where specific fees or terms are discussed.
• Review and update pages when we become aware of material changes.

Why this matters

A reader who acts on an outdated fee figure or an expired policy detail can make a worse decision than one who was directed to verify. When in doubt, we err on the side of directing readers to official sources rather than presenting potentially stale information as current fact.

6. Handling statistics and data

We follow strict rules when using numbers in our content:

• We only use statistics we can attribute to a specific, named source.
• We understand what the number actually means before using it — we do not selectively quote figures out of context.
• We distinguish between national data, survey sample data, and modelled estimates, and we present each type appropriately.
• We avoid false precision — if a source says "approximately 40%", we do not report it as exactly 40%.
• We do not use statistics solely to add authority to a point. A number is only included if it genuinely improves the reader's understanding.
• We do not invent, round up, or extrapolate beyond what the source supports.

7. Handling uncertainty

If a fact is unclear, contested, or impossible to verify with available sources, we handle it in one of the following ways:

• We state the uncertainty directly — "terms may vary", "confirm with your provider", "this may differ depending on account type".
• We direct readers to the official source that holds the authoritative answer.
• We omit the claim entirely if it cannot be responsibly framed.

We never paper over uncertainty with confident-sounding language. Finance content that sounds certain when the underlying information is not does active harm to readers.

Phrases we use to frame uncertainty

"Terms may vary by provider." — "Charges can change; verify on the provider's official page." — "This may differ depending on account type." — "The provider's latest terms are the best source to confirm this." — "As of [month/year], though this is subject to change."

8. What we will not do

• Invent citations. We never fabricate a source, attribute a claim to an institution that did not make it, or reference a study we have not read.
• Guess at current charges or fees. If we cannot confirm a fee from an official source, we do not publish a figure.
• Use AI-generated summaries as source substitutes. AI tools may assist with drafting and organisation, but they do not replace source verification. Every important factual claim must trace back to a real source.
• Overstate what a source supports. If a survey covers 2,000 respondents in Lagos, we do not use it to characterise all Nigerians.
• Stack secondary sources to create false authority. Multiple secondary sources agreeing with each other does not make a claim primary-source verified.
• Silently leave known errors in place. If we discover an error after publication, we correct it promptly and verify the correction before publishing it.

9. Corrections and updates

When a factual error is identified — whether discovered internally or reported by a reader — we follow this process:

1. Identify the specific claim that is incorrect and locate the relevant section of the article.
2. Research and verify the correct information using primary or strong secondary sources.
3. Update the article with the corrected information.
4. Revise the publication or review date on the article.
5. Note the correction in the article where appropriate, particularly where a reader may have acted on the previous information.
6. Check whether any related pages on the site contain the same error and update those as needed.

We do not hide corrections or silently rewrite content without acknowledgment. Trust matters more than protecting any prior version of an article.

10. Report an error

If you believe something on this site is factually incorrect, we want to know. Please use our Contact page and select "I found a factual error in an article" as the reason. Include the following to help us investigate quickly:

• The URL of the article containing the error.
• The specific claim you believe is incorrect, quoted or described clearly.
• The source you are using to support the correction, with a link if available.

We investigate all credible corrections and respond to those that require a reply. We appreciate readers who take the time to help us maintain accuracy — it is part of how this site earns and keeps trust.