A corrected report needs a traceable public replacement

Establish what the issuer actually corrected

Retain the original report, the correction notice and the replacement supplied by the issuer. Compare their report identifiers, revision labels, dates, product or sample identifiers and batch or lot references. Record which document is superseded and the change the issuer identifies. Do not use the upload date as the report date or assume that a newer filename supersedes every earlier report for the product.

Distinguish an administrative correction from a changed finding or qualification using the issuer's actual notice. If that distinction is unclear, leave it unresolved and ask for clarification. The store should not recalculate an analytical result or silently repair the issuer's wording. A replacement for one sample or batch also does not establish that reports for other batches have changed.

Find the claims as well as the links

Build an inventory from the old file address, report reference and the specific value or wording affected by the correction. Inspect product pages, collection descriptions, FAQs, articles, download lists and images where the store uses that evidence. A page can keep repeating a superseded finding after its file link has been replaced. A screenshot of the old report can be a separate public copy even when the downloadable document is current.

For each occurrence, record the exact claim, its location and the part of the corrected report needed to support it. Classify it as still supported, needing revision or no longer supported. A claim unchanged by the correction still needs an accurate reference; one that exceeds the revised evidence needs narrower wording or removal. Do not carry a conclusion forward merely because the product remains for sale.

The FTC's truth-in-advertising guidance states that advertising must be truthful, not misleading and substantiated across media, including websites. That is the reason to review the surrounding claim and image as well as the download. The guidance does not approve a particular research-only phrase or establish the validity of a laboratory finding.

Choose an honest outcome for the old document address

Publish an authorized replacement with a distinguishable version reference, then update each affected claim and evidence link to match it. Keep an internal record of the old and new public locations, the issuer's correction date, the publication date and the person responsible. Where readers need the change explained, provide an accurate correction notice rather than implying that the revised finding was always the one published.

Decide separately what the old URL will do. It can lead to a clearly explained replacement, remain an accurately labeled superseded record where public retention is appropriate, or be removed while the original is preserved privately. Do not leave an old report looking current or redirect it to an unrelated document. If the old file also exposes private material, preserve history without continuing that exposure; public availability and internal retention are separate decisions.

Google documents that redirects lead to a destination whose content is processed, while real 404 and 410 responses represent missing content and can eventually remove indexed URLs. A 200 response does not guarantee indexing, and error text returned with success can be treated as a soft 404. These behaviors describe Google's handling of URLs. They do not promise immediate replacement, removal or erasure of downloaded copies.

Verify what visitors receive and record the remaining reach

Open every affected page after the change, read the displayed claim, follow its evidence link and inspect the document actually delivered. Compare the issuer, report reference and version with the approved replacement. Also open the old file URL directly to confirm its chosen behavior. Record the date and outcome for each location; a file upload receipt alone does not establish that all pages now show the correct version.

Keep uncorrected locations visible in the map. Merchant-controlled pages need an owner for the remaining change; external copies or links need a separate note identifying who controls them and any correction request. Do not record an external change as complete until it has been observed. The useful completion boundary is the set of verified pages and file locations, with unresolved copies explicitly listed, not a claim that the old report has vanished everywhere.

For a Prism website-review consultation, provide the website, research-only product categories, affected public URLs and a non-sensitive summary of the correction question. Scope, responsibilities, fees and terms are discussed before work; do not assume document replacement or technical changes are already included. The public form excludes payment details, passwords and customer records. Follow-up is by email, and the inquiry does not book an appointment, purchase work or submit a processing application.

Corrected-report replacement map

Use one map per issuer correction. For the affected-claim and verification rows, list each real page or image location separately in your notes. A replacement is complete only for locations whose displayed claim and delivered document have been checked. Keep private archive references internal and distinguish report dates from publication and verification dates.

Worksheet entries are not submitted by Prism’s worksheet and are not saved by the site. Use record types, availability, anonymized observations, or match/mismatch results. Do not enter government identifiers, customer names or addresses, customer messages, receipt-access links, card or bank details, passwords, or keys. Send sensitive documents only through the provider’s verified secure channel.

These are temporary notes. Leaving or reloading this page may clear them. Worksheet entries are not sent automatically. If you copy notes into the consultation message and submit the form, Prism receives them as part of your request.