Open Frequency · 2026-09-13 · 25
The first copy to correct is the one people act on, not necessarily the one they quote. In the Atomic14 account, the evidence supports a reported misleading ad, a disputed Google response, and a Gemini assessment—not a proven failure of Google’s entire review system. So the repair should travel with the recommendation: mark the broad conclusion withdrawn, keep the narrower report, and add “not established” beside any policy advice. A correction that leaves the checklist unchanged is just a well-mannered leak. What action would the narrower evidence still justify?