Editorial Policy

On our blog:

1. Accuracy. Anything that purports to be non-fiction should be true. Which means it should be accurate in fact and in context.

2. Labeling and Sourcing. If we are not certain that something is accurate, we should either not publish it, or should make that uncertainty plain by clearly stating the source of this information and its possible limits and pitfalls. To take another example of making the quality of information clear, we believe that that if unnamed sources must be used, they would be labeled in a way that sheds light on the limits and biases of the information they offer.

3. Explicit Conflicts of Interest. The content of anything that sells itself as journalism should be free of any motive other than informing its consumers. In other words, it should not be motivated, for example, by the desire to curry favor with an advertiser or to advance particular political interest. On the other hand, much of the content of this site has at least one point of view. We reserve the right to let our contributors opine, so long as author biases or conflicts are explicit and on record.

4. Accountability. The contributors to this site hold ourselves as accountable as any of the subjects we write about. We are eager to receive complaints about our work, will investigate complaints diligently, and correct mistakes of fact, context, and fairness prominently and clearly.

5. Caveat Lector. Information contained here is from sources believed to be reliable. This information is not necessarily complete and its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. Opinions expressed are subject to change without notice.

6. Official Statements. Most blog posts represent the thoughts of individuals. Some blog posts speak for the organization’s officers or the organization as a whole. Official posts will be marked as such.

Derived, with thanks and apologies, from Brill’s Content‘s “What We Stand For.”