Which authorities and institutions does this cover?
Cities and municipalities on one side, agencies and utilities on the other. What they share is that their information is not marketing but service delivery: if the answer is wrong, someone stands at a closed desk with the wrong paperwork.
| Who | Who decides | What keeps them up at night |
|---|---|---|
| City or municipality | The communications team, with the executive behind them | Neutrality, accuracy, and a resident standing at a closed desk |
| Agency or utility | Communications together with the board | Accuracy and neutrality, and holding up in a crisis |
Why does an AI invent a procedure that does not exist?
Rarely out of nothing. Usually because two versions of a procedure are findable — an old one that reads well and a new one buried in a pdf or a council decision — and the engine picks the more readable. Age weighs less with an engine than readability, and that is exactly the problem.
| Driver | What ceeme measures underneath | What stays dark without a connection |
|---|---|---|
| Hallucination risk | invented and outdated facts about you, counted by type | We see what an engine invents about you, and we follow the media coverage around it through the press feed. |
| Source authority | the standing of the sources that name you | Which sources name you and how much they weigh, we see. Writing to them is human work. |
| Governance risk | who may publish what, and whether it can be undone | We show who may do what. Enforcing it per channel needs an operator flag and an adapter. |
| Regional relevance | whether you score the same in one region as in the next | For Belgium this is exact. For a region without its own registers it is an estimate, and it says so. |
| Reputation risk | misquotes, sliding reviews and where they come from | Reviews and social are read live. Print and paywalled media are not in there. |
Which sources weigh most for official information?
Your own domain weighs more here than in any commercial sector: an engine that must state an official procedure looks for an official source and recognises it by the domain. That is an advantage you hold, and you only lose it by making your own information hard to read.
| Source | Kind |
|---|---|
| GBP | public — we read it, you connect nothing |
| press and news | public — we read it, you connect nothing |
| public — we read it, you connect nothing | |
| company registers | public — we read it, you connect nothing |
| public — we read it, you connect nothing | |
| registers | public — we read it, you connect nothing |
| GA4 | connected — only after your approval, read-only unless agreed otherwise |
| GSC | connected — only after your approval, read-only unless agreed otherwise |
| CMS (read→scoped) | connected — only after your approval, read-only unless agreed otherwise |
Could an elected official use this to promote themselves?
No. Political marketing and party content are forbidden in the code, and that holds even when the request sounds innocent — attaching a quote from an elected official to a correct procedure already crosses the line. What gets corrected is the information, not who delivers it.
| Rule | Kind |
|---|---|
| Nothing is produced that promotes an authority or a person. What gets corrected is the information, not who delivers it. | hard rule — the build refuses output that crosses it |
| Nothing goes out without the person authorised to sign off at your organisation having seen it — the flow sits in the code, not in an understanding. | hard rule — the build refuses output that crosses it |
| A correction never promotes an authority, a department or an office-holder. It states what is accurate and where to check it. | forbidden — we do not do this, not even on request |
| Political or party content is blocked before generation, even when the request sounds innocent. | hard rule — the build refuses output that crosses it |
| Every correction is factual and checkable. Where a fact ends and a judgement begins, the output stops. | hard rule — the build refuses output that crosses it |
| Is not written, in any route and on any request. | forbidden — we do not do this, not even on request |
What happens when misinformation about us is circulating?
Then it arrives as an alert with the source attached, not as a number at the end of the month. Your communications team assesses, and the correction follows the same route as any other official communication. The difference from today is not the procedure but the fact that you see it at all.
Frequently asked questions
We already publish everything on our website. Why is the answer wrong then?
Usually because the old one is still there too. An archived page, a 2022 news item, or a council decision written better than the current procedure page. An engine picks not the most recent but the clearest, and that is the fix: remove the old one or mark it explicitly as expired.
May you correct something with an outside source on our behalf?
Only with your approval, and even then it is human work. Writing to an outside editor is not a button but a letter, and the table above says so — what a connection cannot do, we do not present as a feature.
Our remit shifts every few years. Does this keep up?
It notices, and that is usually where it becomes useful. A remit that moves to another level leaves traces everywhere that nobody clears up — and an engine keeps reading those traces. At every measurement such an outdated reference comes back as a finding with its address.
Read on
Free, no account and no card.