Kin Wire doesn’t report the news. It reads what actual journalists published, tells you in a few lines what happened, and links you to their article. If an item matters to you, the link is there so you can read the real thing.
Sometimes the only link available for an item is the outlet’s front page rather than the article itself. The link still works and still takes you to the right publication — it just won’t drop you on the story. When that happens the source is marked home, so you know before you click.
It happens when no article-level link could be found, and we’d rather give you the outlet than nothing at all — the story is usually still on that front page, or one search away. Measured across 127 source links in briefs generated since 1 September 2026, it’s about 4% of them — down from 11% before a repair pass started chasing the article-level link.
A step closer than home, but still not the story. Sometimes the only link available lands on a section of the outlet’s site — a news index, a category page, an events listing — rather than the article itself. When that happens the source is marked section.
The article is usually the first thing on that page, or one search away. We mark it for the same reason we mark home: you should know what a link will do before you click it. In the same measurement, about 13% of source links land on a section, and the remaining 84% go straight to the story.
Every item in a brief is supposed to be from the last few days. When the page a source points at was published more than six weeks ago, the source is marked older.
It means the item may not be current, and you should check the date on the source before treating it as news. This is the marker worth paying attention to — a front-page link is merely imprecise, but an old source can make something that happened two years ago read like it happened this week.
We added it because that is exactly what happened: a brief cited a newsletter’s weekly round-up from 2024 and presented it as current. Nothing on the page could have told you. The date had in fact been detected and then hidden, on the reasoning that showing an old date might mislead — which got it precisely backwards. Now it is shown, and marked.
Occasionally an item carries no link at all. That’s marked no source, and it means what it says: this item is unverified, and you should treat it that way.
It happens when the brief was written without a specific article to point at — sometimes because the underlying reporting was thin, sometimes because the model summarised without attributing. It’s a small share of items, and we’d rather show you the gap than hide it.
We don’t fill these in afterwards. Searching later and attaching whatever article looks close would be claiming “this came from here” when the truth is only “here is something similar” — and a confidently wrong source link is worse than a missing one, because nothing about it looks wrong.
Briefs are written by Claude, Anthropic’s AI, searching the live web. It can make mistakes, like any AI and like any summary. The linked source is always the authoritative version. For anything urgent — a fire, a closure, an evacuation — check the official channel rather than a brief.