Editorial Standards

1. Sourcing

Every factual claim we publish must be grounded in reliable, verifiable sourcing. We prioritize primary sources — original documents, direct interviews, official records, and first-hand accounts — over secondary reporting. When secondary sources are used, they must be clearly identified and, wherever possible, traced back to the original information.

Standards for sources

• Primary sources first. We seek out the people, documents, and data closest to the story. This includes public records, court filings, financial disclosures, scientific studies, and on-the-record interviews.
• Verification. A single source is rarely sufficient for a controversial or consequential claim. We independently corroborate facts through multiple sources or documentary evidence before publication.
• Expertise matters. When citing experts, we confirm their credentials and relevant experience. We avoid presenting opinion as fact, and we label analysis and commentary clearly.
• Transparency about gaps. If information cannot be fully verified, we say so in the reporting. We do not present speculation as established fact.
• Diverse perspectives. We actively seek out a range of voices and viewpoints, especially from communities directly affected by the stories we cover.

2. Attribution

Attribution is a cornerstone of credibility. We clearly tell readers where our information comes from, giving them the context to evaluate its reliability. Attribution should be specific, timely, and easy to understand.

How we attribute

• Direct quotes. When we quote someone, we use their exact words and identify them by name and relevant title or affiliation. We do not alter quotes except to remove verbal tics or clarify meaning with bracketed notes, and we never change the intent.
• Paraphrasing. When we summarize or paraphrase information, we clearly indicate the source — e.g., "according to a report by the Government Accountability Office" or "police said in a statement."
• Documents and data. We link to or cite the specific document, dataset, or study. Where a link is unavailable, we provide enough detail for readers to locate the material.
• Other media. When we reference reporting by another news organization, we credit that outlet by name and, when possible, link to the original story.
• Social media. Posts from social media platforms are attributed to the account holder, with a screenshot or archived link where appropriate. We verify the authenticity of accounts before relying on them.

Attribution should appear close to the claim it supports. We avoid vague phrases like "sources say" or "it is reported" without providing as much specificity as possible.

3. Anonymous Sources

We use anonymous sources sparingly and only when the information is of significant public interest and cannot be obtained any other way. Anonymity is a tool for accountability, not a convenience. When we grant anonymity, we do so with strict conditions and editorial oversight.

When anonymity is permitted

• The source faces a genuine risk of retaliation, physical harm, job loss, or legal jeopardy if identified.
• The information is vital to the public interest and cannot be obtained from an on-the-record source.
• The source has direct knowledge of the facts they are providing, not hearsay or second-hand information.
• At least one editor knows the source's identity and approves the use of anonymity.

Our commitments to readers

• We explain the anonymity. We tell readers why the source is anonymous and what potential bias or motivation they might have (e.g., "a defense official who was not authorized to speak publicly").
• We corroborate. Information from an anonymous source is independently verified through documents or a second source whenever possible.
• We limit anonymity. Anonymity is granted for a specific story, not as a blanket arrangement. We do not allow anonymous sources to use our platform for personal attacks or unsubstantiated claims.
• We do not deceive. We never misrepresent an anonymous source's identity or role to readers.

4. AI Use

We recognize that artificial intelligence tools are evolving and can assist journalists in research, data analysis, and workflow efficiency. However, AI must never replace human judgment, verification, or ethical responsibility. Our use of AI is guided by transparency, accountability, and a commitment to accuracy.

Permitted uses of AI

• Research assistance. AI tools may be used to surface background information, suggest search terms, or summarize large volumes of public documents — always subject to human verification.
• Data analysis. AI can help identify patterns or anomalies in datasets, provided a journalist reviews and confirms the findings.
• Transcription and translation. Automated transcription and translation services may be used as a first pass, but a human must review the output for accuracy before publication.
• Workflow support. AI may assist with scheduling, headline suggestions, or SEO optimization, but final editorial decisions remain with humans.

Prohibited uses of AI

• Generating publishable content. We do not publish AI-generated text, images, or audio as original reporting. All published content is written and edited by humans.
• Fabricating or altering quotes. AI must never be used to create, modify, or simulate quotes or source statements.
• Replacing verification. AI output is never treated as a source. Any fact or claim produced with AI assistance must be independently verified through traditional sourcing.
• Creating deceptive media. We do not use AI to create deepfakes, synthetic voice recordings, or misleading imagery.

All journalists and contributors are required to complete training on our AI policies before using any AI tool in their work.

5. Plagiarism Policy

Plagiarism — presenting someone else's words, ideas, or creative work as your own — is a serious violation of journalistic ethics and is strictly prohibited. We are committed to original reporting and writing, and we take all allegations of plagiarism seriously.

What constitutes plagiarism

• Copying text. Using another person's exact words without quotation marks and proper attribution, whether from a news article, book, website, or any other source.
• Close paraphrase. Reproducing someone else's sentence structure or phrasing with only minor word changes, without credit.
• Uncredited ideas. Presenting another person's original ideas, analysis, or research as your own without acknowledgment.
• Self-plagiarism. Reusing substantial portions of your own previously published work without disclosure and editorial approval.
• Image and media plagiarism. Using photographs, illustrations, video, or audio without proper license or attribution.

Our commitments

• Original work. All content we publish is the original work of our journalists or is properly licensed and attributed.
• Attribution always. When we draw on the work of others, we credit them clearly — whether through in-text attribution, links, or a sources section.
• Plagiarism checks. We use plagiarism-detection tools as part of our editorial review process for freelance and staff contributions.
• Accountability. Any confirmed instance of plagiarism will result in corrective action, which may include a published correction, removal of the content, and disciplinary measures up to termination.