About Irvako Newsroom
An independent newsroom, operated by FADI B.V. in Utrecht, documenting Canadian public-interest media moments with a clear line between recording, inference, and correction.
Why we started, and what we publish
Irvako Newsroom began in 2020 after a recurring pattern became hard to ignore: live broadcasts produced the most consequential public moments, yet the most searchable “official” record often became a recap clip or a cleaned transcript. The gap between what aired and what remained available created room for misremembering, overclaiming, and tidy edits that removed the unglamorous details that matter in media accountability.
We publish investigations and notes centred on primary artefacts—recordings, timecodes, continuity edits, and the technical cues that show how a signal travelled. When we describe a broadcast mishap, we do it as a technical object first: what appeared, for how long, and what other versions show. Only then do we treat it as narrative. That order keeps rumours from hardening into “facts” and lets a correction land cleanly when new evidence arrives.
Mission statement
Document Canadian public-interest media moments with a methodical separation between the recording, the plausible explanation, and the parts that remain unverified. Publish in a way that can be audited later: what changed, why it changed, and what evidence was added.
What we do not claim
- We are not a broadcaster, and we do not speak for any Canadian network or production team.
- We do not assign intent when routine routing, switching, or pre-flight checks could explain a mistake.
- We do not publish raw sources by default; we quote and paraphrase with context and timecodes.
- We do not use “gotcha” framing. If a claim cannot be supported, it stays out.
Reporting standards you can audit
Our standards are built for messy broadcast moments: the half-second of the wrong input, the overlay that should have stayed in rehearsal, the recap edit that turns a stumble into a smooth line. We treat those details as evidence, not trivia.
How we verify a live artefact
- Prefer independent recordings with persistent programme graphics and visible edges of the on-air overlay.
- Track time drift and buffering: consumer PVRs and captures rarely align to the same second.
- Compare live to recap for continuity edits: jump cuts, missing phrases, altered lower-thirds.
- Keep a ledger of claims: “observable” versus “inferred,” with a separate queue for “needs corroboration.”
Attribution rules
We use generic roles for on-air participants unless a name is essential and safely verifiable. Viewer messages are paraphrased or anonymised, with context about when they were received.
Corrections
When new evidence changes the record, we add a dated change note and state what was updated. We do not quietly rewrite an assertion that readers may have already shared.
What “unverified” means here
Commissioned work uses the same standards
For commissioned reporting, we deliver a written report with a sources ledger, timecoded citations where applicable, and a plain-language explanation of what is still uncertain. It is not a marketing “audit”; it is a newsroom artefact.
The team
This is a small newsroom. Roles overlap. Everyone touches verification, and everyone signs off on corrections. The work is mostly careful, sometimes tedious, and designed to be read by people who can spot a weak claim in a single paragraph.
Mara K., Editor (MA)
Mara has edited broadcast and digital investigations for 11 years, with a focus on on-air accountability and correction workflows. She is the one who insists on timecodes in drafts and a clean distinction between what a recording shows and what we think it means. Colleagues know her for blunt margin notes and meticulous headline hygiene. When she is not editing, she keeps a paper logbook, because batteries die at inconvenient times.
Jonas P., Broadcast Artefact Researcher (BEng)
Jonas has spent 8 years analysing how live video fails: wrong inputs, unkeyed overlays, and the small routing mistakes that look dramatic on screen. He builds the “signal path” notes that sit behind our stories, translating jargon into clear language without turning routine operations into mystery. His specialty is spotting continuity edits and identifying when a clip has been conformed for recap. He also maintains a small library of reference frames for lower-third layouts and playout cues.
Alyssa R., Verification Lead (PgCert)
Alyssa has worked in verification and evidence management for 9 years across media and research contexts. She keeps the “observable vs inferred” ledger, and she is the one who pushes back when a draft starts to sound confident without support. Her specialty is triangulation: matching independent recordings, reconciling time drift, and documenting what a viewer could reasonably read on screen. Outside the newsroom, she is known for collecting vintage calendars and using them to check dates quickly.
Where we are
Irvako Newsroom is operated by FADI B.V. from Utrecht, Netherlands. The physical office address is listed below for transparency and for legal contact. Our reporting concerns Canadian public-interest media moments, but we do not claim affiliation with any broadcaster, production company, or network.
How to send a tip safely
Tips are read by newsroom staff. If you include a link to a recording, include a short description of what appears on screen and a time window (for example, “around 09:10–09:20 into the segment”). If you cannot share a file, a precise description still helps us request the right artefacts and compare public versions.
Do not include sensitive personal data you do not want published. We minimise what we store, and we publish only what is necessary to describe the record of what aired.
Contact the newsroom
Use this form for tips, corrections, or commissioned reporting enquiries. We will reply as soon as possible. If your message references a broadcast moment, include the date, the program type (panel, interview, recap), and any timecodes you noted.