Editorial standards

NewsReverse is an accountability-focused news publication. These editorial standards describe how we gather, check, and publish what you read here. They are a commitment, not a boast: we are a new newsroom without a track record, and we would rather be judged against a clear standard than against vague promises. If we fall short of anything written below, we want to hear about it, and we will correct it in the open.

How we source

Wherever we can, we link directly to primary sources: the court filing, the official dataset, the company statement, the transcript, the recording, the law. When a claim rests on a document, we would rather point you to the document than ask you to trust our paraphrase of it. If a source is a secondary report by another outlet, we say so and link to it rather than presenting its reporting as our own.

We label claims we have not been able to independently verify. If a figure comes from an interested party, we attribute it to that party rather than stating it as established fact. When something is disputed, we try to represent the disagreement fairly rather than flattening it into a single tidy conclusion.

Verification

Before we publish, we work to confirm the factual core of a story through more than one independent line of evidence where the significance of the claim warrants it. We check names, titles, dates, numbers, and quotations against original records. We contact the people and organisations who are the subject of significant or critical claims and give them a genuine opportunity to respond before publication, and we reflect that response in the story.

Where a story is still developing and we cannot yet confirm key details, we say plainly what we know, what we do not know, and what we are still working to establish. We would rather publish a smaller, accurate story than a larger one we cannot stand behind.

Anonymous sources

We prefer named, on-the-record sources, because they let you weigh the source’s motives for yourself. We grant anonymity only when a source risks real harm, such as retaliation or legal jeopardy, and when the information they provide is important and cannot reasonably be obtained another way. When we do rely on an unnamed source, we tell you as much as we can about why they are in a position to know and why we granted anonymity, without identifying them. We do not let anonymous sources use us to attack others without accountability, and we corroborate their claims wherever possible.

Use of artificial intelligence

Journalism at NewsReverse is done by people, and people are accountable for it. We may use software tools, including AI-assisted tools, for narrow tasks such as transcription, translation, drafting suggestions, formatting, or searching large sets of documents. A human editor reviews and is responsible for everything we publish. We do not publish AI-generated text as though a person reported it, we do not use AI to invent quotes, sources, or facts, and we do not present synthetic images or audio as genuine. If AI plays a material role in how a particular story was produced, we will disclose that in the story itself.

Independence and conflicts of interest

Our editorial decisions are made on the merits of the story, not to please advertisers, sources, or anyone else. Staff and contributors are expected to disclose any financial, personal, or professional relationship that could reasonably be seen to affect their coverage, and to step back from stories where a conflict cannot be managed. If we ever cover a matter in which NewsReverse or its owners have a direct interest, we will disclose that interest in the story. Any sponsored or paid content will be clearly labelled as such and kept separate from our journalism.

Fairness and corrections

We aim to treat the subjects of our reporting fairly, to seek comment, and to represent people’s positions accurately. We make mistakes, and when we do we fix them promptly and visibly rather than quietly. Corrections are logged on our Corrections page with the date, the original claim, and what changed.

If you believe we have published something inaccurate, unfair, or misleading, please tell us. Email corrections@newsreverse.xyz with the article title or link, the specific point you believe is wrong, and any evidence you can share. We read every message, we respond to correction requests, and we act on the ones that are substantiated.

Holding ourselves to this

These standards are a living document. As NewsReverse grows and learns, we will revise this page and note when we have done so. Our aim is simple and, we hope, testable: to give you reporting you can check for yourself, sourced openly, corrected honestly, and produced by people who put their names to it.