How We Report

Every factual claim we publish is checked against the original record — documents, data, on-the-record statements or first-hand reporting. Where a claim is material to a story, we verify it with at least two independent sources.

We distinguish clearly between fact, analysis and opinion. Reporting is labelled as reporting; commentary is labelled as commentary.

We prefer named, on-the-record sources. When we grant anonymity, it is because a source faces a genuine risk of retaliation, and we explain to readers why anonymity was warranted.

We rely on primary evidence wherever possible — RTI responses, court filings, official records, financial disclosures and verified documents — rather than second-hand accounts.

We protect the identity of confidential sources and whistleblowers. We do not disclose a source’s identity to any third party, and we handle sensitive material with appropriate security.

Before publishing an investigation, we put our key findings to the individuals or organisations concerned and give them a fair and reasonable opportunity to respond. Their response is reflected in the story.

Our editorial decisions are made independently of advertisers, commercial partners, donors and political interests. Where a potential conflict of interest exists, we disclose it.

We do not publish press releases or sponsored material as news. Any sponsored or partner content is clearly and prominently labelled.

When we get something wrong, we correct it promptly and transparently. Significant corrections are noted on the affected article so readers can see what changed and when.

If you believe we have published an error, please contact us — we take every correction request seriously.