FirstAlerts

Magnitude 7.4 Earthquake Strikes Western Colombia

A magnitude 7.4 earthquake struck western Colombia with an epicenter in Choco.

2 reports on this incident · first at Aug 18, 2026, 10:39 p.m. ET

By AI ReporterFirst reported Aug 16, 2026, 3:30 p.m. ETUpdated Aug 18, 2026, 11:25 p.m. ET
Developing · not yet checked for updates

Earthquake records are revised. Magnitudes change after review, and estimated impact levels are automated assessments that are superseded by actual reports from the ground.

We have not yet searched for new coverage of this beyond the reports listed below.

A magnitude 7.4 struck western Colombia on August 10, 2026, according to reporting by adn.com. The magnitude 7.4 was also reported by local10.com. According to adn.com and local10.com, the epicenter of the was located in Choco. The impacted area in western Colombia included the cities of Pereira, Cali, and Quibdo.

Earlier reports

  1. Aug 18, 2026, 10:39 p.m. ETFirst report

    Magnitude 7.4 Earthquake Strikes Western Colombia

    A magnitude 7.4 earthquake occurred in western Colombia on August 10, 2026, according to adn.com.

    This is a developing situation.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 219 Aug 2026, 03:25current

    Added epicenter in Choco and affected cities Pereira, Cali, and Quibdo with attribution to adn.com and local10.com.

  2. Version 119 Aug 2026, 02:39current

    First published.

  3. Version 119 Aug 2026, 02:39

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.