Last updated Thu, Apr 30, 2026

Editorial policy

This policy describes how Chicken in a Suit produces journalism: how we report, how we verify, how we disclose, and how we hold ourselves accountable. It is part of our commitment to the principles outlined in Our principles.

1. Independence

Editorial decisions — story selection, framing, sourcing, publication timing — are made exclusively by editors. Advertisers, sponsors, technology partners, and any commercial relationship of any kind have no influence on what we publish, when, or how.

We do not run native advertising or sponsored content presented as journalism. If sponsored content ever appears, it will be visually distinct, clearly labeled “Sponsored” or “Paid post,” and prepared without the involvement of the newsroom.

2. Sourcing

Every claim of fact in an article comes from one of three sources:

• A named source. Most quotes and attributions are on the record. We use direct quotation when possible and paraphrase when clarity demands it.
• A public document. Court filings, regulatory submissions, peer-reviewed research, and official statistics are linked or cited inline whenever available.
• Original reporting. Our own observation, interviews, or analysis — clearly framed as such.

We grant anonymity sparingly and only when:

• A source faces a real and specific risk (professional, physical, or legal) from being named.
• The information cannot be obtained any other way.
• A senior editor approves the use.

We disclose to readers what we know about an anonymous source’s credibility and motivation — without compromising their identity.

3. Fact-checking

Every story is reviewed by at least one editor other than its author before publication. Quotes are checked against the original recording or transcript. Numbers are checked against the original source. Dates, names, and titles are confirmed.

For investigative and longform pieces, we add a separate fact-check pass, often by an editor who was not involved in the reporting. Errors caught during this pass are corrected pre-publication.

4. Conflicts of interest

Reporters disclose conflicts to editors before an assignment is accepted. Categories of conflict include:

• Financial holdings in companies or sectors covered.
• Personal or family relationships with sources or subjects.
• Past employment at organizations under coverage.
• Ongoing personal relationships with anyone in the story.

Where a conflict exists, we either reassign the story or, in cases where the reporter’s expertise is essential, disclose the conflict prominently to readers. We do not accept gifts, paid travel, or honoraria from organizations we cover.

5. AI tools

We use AI tools selectively and with disclosure. Specifically:

• AI for research and transcription: routine and not separately disclosed in stories.
• AI for code and data analysis: routine; methodology is described where the analysis is the story.
• AI for the body of articles: we do not use AI to write the prose readers see. Every paragraph in every article is written by a human journalist.
• AI for visualization or data extraction: disclosed in a methodology note when materially used.

When AI tools are used in a way that materially affects what a reader sees — a chart, a map, a transcribed quote — we add a note explaining the tool, its inputs, and its limitations.

6. Pre-publication review

We share quotes with sources for accuracy review when timing allows and when doing so does not compromise the story. We do not share full drafts. Pre-publication accuracy review is for verifying what a source said, not for granting approval over how their words are used.

7. Anonymity for vulnerable sources

In stories involving vulnerable sources — survivors of violence, whistleblowers, individuals at risk of retaliation — we use additional safeguards: stripping metadata from documents, encrypting communications, and providing source-protection guidance proactively.

8. Corrections and accountability

When we make a factual error, we correct it in place and add a dated correction note at the bottom of the story. For meaningful errors, we publish a separate correction notice. For major errors, we issue a retraction.

Our correction process is described on the corrections page.

9. Comments and reader feedback

We welcome reader feedback by email at feedback@example.com. We read everything; we reply to anything that needs a reply. We do not currently host an open comments section. If we add one, it will be moderated against a public set of community guidelines.

10. Training, supervision, and accountability

Our writers and editors complete annual training on libel law, source protection, ethics, and accessibility. Editorial managers conduct quarterly review of bylines for quality, sourcing, and disclosure compliance. The publisher provides final accountability for all editorial output.

Contact

For questions about editorial standards, write to editorial@example.com.