Editorial Policy

How I work – and why it matters

I am not neutral – but I am rigorous. These are the standards I hold myself to and the principles that govern everything I publish.

Independence

I accept no advertising and no funding from any organisation I might reasonably investigate. I accept no grants from political parties, lobbying groups, government bodies, or corporate foundations. My work is entirely reader‑supported. If this ever changes, I will say so publicly and explain why.

Accuracy

I do not publish claims I cannot evidence. Every factual assertion in every investigation is sourced – to correspondence, documents, recordings, official responses, or named individuals who have consented to being quoted.

I distinguish clearly between what is documented and what I believe or assess to be the case. Opinion and analysis are clearly labelled. I do not present speculation as fact.

When I get something wrong – and I will, because every publication does – I correct it promptly, transparently, and without trying to minimise what happened. Corrections are published in the same place as the original error, normally within 5 working days of becoming aware of the error.

Right of reply

Every organisation named critically in my investigations is contacted before publication and given a reasonable opportunity to respond. The specific claims I intend to publish are put to them directly.

Responses are published in full, without editing, alongside the investigation. If an organisation declines to comment or does not respond by the stated deadline, that is recorded in the published piece.

I do not accept legal threats as a substitute for substantive responses. If an organisation’s only reply is a legal letter, I say so.

Source protection

I never identify a source without their explicit written permission. This is not negotiable under any circumstances.

I do not keep records that could identify confidential sources beyond what is operationally necessary, and I delete those records once they are no longer needed.

If you share information with me on a confidential basis, I will tell you clearly what I can and cannot protect before you disclose it – including any limitations imposed by UK law (such as court orders or counter‑terrorism legislation). I will never mislead a source about the risks.

If you do not explicitly request confidentiality, I may still choose to protect your identity at my discretion. When in doubt, I err on the side of protection.

Private individuals

I never publish identifying information about a private individual without their explicit written consent. This includes names, addresses, images, and any detail that could identify them to people who do not already know their situation.

People who share their stories with me retain full control over what is published. They can withdraw consent at any time before publication. After publication, I will work with them on any concerns about the content.

This standard applies absolutely to children and to vulnerable adults.

Public figures and institutions

People who exercise public power or institutional authority over others accept scrutiny of how they exercise that power. I will name individuals in positions of institutional responsibility where it is in the public interest to do so and where they have been given the opportunity to respond.

I consider something to be in the public interest if it affects the functioning of public institutions, the exercise of power, the safety of vulnerable people, or the honesty of those in positions of trust. This is not the same as what the public might be curious about.

I do not publish personal information about public figures that is unrelated to their exercise of public duties.

Complaints

If you believe I have made an error, treated someone unfairly, or breached any of the standards set out in this policy, contact me via my contact page with the specific concern and any supporting information.

I will acknowledge your complaint within five working days and respond substantively within 20 working days. If I uphold your complaint, I will publish a correction. If I do not, I will explain why.

I take editorial complaints seriously. If you are not satisfied with my response, I will tell you what further avenues are available to you.

A note on my perspective

I am not a neutral publication. I believe that institutions have obligations to the people they serve, that vulnerable people deserve better protection than they currently receive, and that journalism should do more than describe problems.

That perspective shapes what I investigate and what I campaign for. It does not shape what I publish as fact. The standard for every factual claim is the same regardless of whether it supports my position or complicates it.

I follow evidence, not narratives. That commitment applies even when the evidence is inconvenient.

Last updated: September 2026