Can users appeal or resubmit a source that Ground News rejected?

1. What Ground News’ public guidance actually says

Ground News’ submission page instructs interested parties to email with the news organization name and website and promises that “our team will review your request promptly” and get in touch if more information is needed or the source is approved ^[1]. The wider Help Center and FAQ emphasize that Ground News aggregates many outlets and has internal processes for assessing sources, but they do not publish a detailed, public checklist of how rejections are handled or how long reviews take ^{[2] [3]}.

2. Can you “appeal” a rejection — what the record shows

None of the available Ground News pages in these search results use the word “appeal” or describe a formal appeals channel after a rejection ^{[1] [2] [3]}. The clear procedural language is submit→team review→we’ll be in touch, which implies you can re-contact them and provide more information, but the company does not document a defined appeal or resubmission pathway in these materials ^[1]. Therefore, available sources do not mention an official appeals process.

3. Practical next steps the site’s guidance implies

Based on the submission instructions, the practical route after a rejection would be to follow the same contact method (email or chatbot) with additional documentation about the outlet (site links, ownership, publication history) and ask for reconsideration; the site explicitly invites submissions and says the team will request further information if needed ^[1]. Ground News’ FAQ and help pages stress that they evaluate sources’ public footprint (e.g., existence, social presence, ownership) and that their team handles reviews, suggesting supplying that kind of documentation would be relevant if you want reconsideration ^{[4] [3]}.

4. Why Ground News might not publish an appeals policy

Ground News presents itself primarily as an aggregator that screens many outlets (claiming tens of thousands of publications) and uses internal review processes and third‑party signals for bias/factuality ratings ^{[4] [5]}. For scalability and editorial control, platforms often keep reviewer discretion internal rather than codifying appeals; Ground News’ help copy consistently frames submissions as something “our team will review” and “passed along for consideration,” indicating a curator-led process rather than an adversarial appeals workflow ^{[1] [3]}.

5. Competing viewpoints and independent criticism to keep in mind

Independent commentary praises Ground News as a useful aggregator and bias-comparison tool but also highlights limits: Columbia Journalism Review criticized aspects of its automated aggregation and paywalled factuality ratings, indicating there is external scrutiny of how Ground News manages sources and transparency ^{[6] [7]}. That criticism suggests why the company might be cautious about publishing a formal appeals mechanism: both automation and editorial judgment create gray areas that are contested by critics ^{[6] [7]}.

6. How to proceed if you represent a rejected source

If you represent a news organization, follow the submission instructions exactly: email the name and website, and use feedback@ground.news or the chatbot as listed. Provide clear public documentation (history, ownership, social accounts, examples of reporting) and explicitly request reconsideration; while Ground News doesn’t advertise an appeal form, its stated workflow commits the team to reviewing submissions and contacting you if further information is required or the source is approved ^{[1] [4]}.

7. Limits of the available reporting

Available Ground News help pages and the FAQ explain submission and review in general terms but do not disclose timelines, a formal appeals process, or a published list of rejection reasons; therefore, any definitive statements about formal appeal rights or guaranteed resubmission opportunities cannot be made from these sources ^{[1] [2] [3]}. External reviews note both utility and criticisms of Ground News’ systems but do not document an appeals mechanism either ^{[6] [7]}.

Bottom line: Ground News invites submissions and says its team will review requests and follow up, but the publicly available help and FAQ pages do not describe a distinct appeals or resubmission procedure after a rejection; the practical option is to re-contact them with more information using the channels they provide ^{[1] [3] [4]}.