Editorial Standards

Last updated: 29 July 2026

Project Truth International is committed to accurate, independent, and evidence-based journalism. These standards guide our investigations, analysis, fact-checking, and news coverage.

Our responsibility is not simply to publish information, but to establish what can be verified, explain what remains uncertain, and distinguish evidence from allegation, interpretation, and opinion.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently of governments, political parties, commercial organisations, donors, advertisers, and other outside interests.

No source of funding, partnership, or professional relationship may determine:

• which subjects we investigate;
• which facts we publish;
• how evidence is interpreted;
• whether a publication is corrected or updated;
• what conclusions our journalists reach.

Any significant conflict of interest that could reasonably affect a contributor’s work must be disclosed to the editorial team.

Accuracy and Verification

We make reasonable efforts to verify all material facts before publication.

Our reporting may be based on:

• court records and official documents;
• corporate and property registers;
• sanctions and procurement databases;
• financial records;
• interviews and witness accounts;
• photographs, videos, satellite imagery, and geolocation;
• archived websites and social media content;
• publicly available data;
• information provided by confidential sources;
• original research and open-source intelligence.

Where possible, we work with primary documents rather than relying only on summaries or previously published reports.

A single source may be sufficient when the source is authoritative and the information can be independently assessed. Serious or contested claims normally require additional verification.

Facts, Allegations, and Analysis

We clearly distinguish between:

• established facts;
• allegations made by identified parties;
• information that has not been independently confirmed;
• editorial analysis;
• opinion.

We do not present suspicion as proof or possibility as certainty.

Headlines, captions, summaries, social media posts, and visual materials must not create a stronger impression than the evidence supports.

When important information remains uncertain, we state that uncertainty clearly.

Serious Allegations

Allegations involving corruption, criminal conduct, sanctions violations, financial misconduct, or abuse of power require a particularly high standard of verification.

A personal, professional, political, or financial connection does not by itself establish participation in wrongdoing.

We do not imply responsibility merely because an individual or organisation:

• appears in the same documents as another party;
• attended the same event;
• worked for the same institution;
• has a family, business, or political connection;
• is mentioned in an allegation or investigation.

Our reporting must explain what the available evidence establishes and what it does not.

Right of Reply

Before publishing significant criticism or serious allegations about an identifiable person, company, institution, or public body, we normally provide that party with a meaningful opportunity to respond.

Our request for comment should:

• describe the substance of the relevant claims;
• include sufficient detail for an informed response;
• provide a reasonable deadline, taking account of urgency and complexity;
• identify any specific documents or events on which comment is requested.

The response, or a fair summary of it, will normally be included in the publication where relevant.

If a party does not respond before publication, we may state that no response was received. A later substantive response may be added where appropriate.

The right of reply does not give a subject editorial control over the publication or an automatic right to prevent publication.

Sources

We assess sources according to their access to the information, reliability, possible motivations, supporting evidence, and consistency with other available material.

We do not pay sources in exchange for allegations or testimony. Reasonable expenses may be considered in exceptional circumstances, but any such arrangement must not influence the content of our reporting.

We do not knowingly encourage sources to obtain information unlawfully.

Confidential Sources

Anonymous and confidential sources may be used when the information is in the public interest and there is a legitimate reason to protect the source’s identity.

Before relying on a confidential source, the editorial team should consider:

• how the source obtained the information;
• whether the source has direct knowledge;
• whether documents or independent evidence support the account;
• whether the source may have a personal, political, or financial motive;
• whether the information can be corroborated;
• whether anonymity is necessary.

The identity of a confidential source is shared internally only with those who need to know.

We take reasonable measures to protect confidential sources, but we do not promise absolute security or anonymity.

Leaked and Submitted Materials

Documents submitted to Project Truth International are not assumed to be authentic merely because they appear official.

We examine, where possible:

• origin and chain of custody;
• metadata and technical characteristics;
• internal consistency;
• dates, signatures, and document formats;
• references to known people, organisations, and events;
• confirmation from independent records or sources;
• whether the material may have been altered, fabricated, or selectively presented.

Publication of leaked material must serve a legitimate public interest. Personal information that does not contribute to that public interest may be withheld or redacted.

Open-Source Intelligence

We may use open-source intelligence methods to verify locations, dates, identities, ownership structures, movements, events, and relationships.

OSINT findings must be documented and reviewed. Where appropriate, we explain the methods used so readers can understand how a conclusion was reached.

Digital content may be incomplete, manipulated, mislabelled, or removed. A social media post, image, or video is not treated as verified solely because it is publicly available.

Use of Documents and Data

We provide links to or reproduce relevant primary documents where doing so is lawful, safe, and useful to readers.

Documents may be redacted to protect:

• confidential sources;
• personal contact details;
• account numbers and identification documents;
• minors and vulnerable individuals;
• unrelated private information;
• operational or security-sensitive information.

Charts, calculations, and data visualisations must accurately reflect the underlying data and clearly identify relevant limitations.

Fairness and Context

Accuracy requires context as well as correct individual facts.

We do not deliberately omit information that materially changes the meaning of a story. Relevant explanations, denials, legal outcomes, and subsequent developments should be included where necessary for a fair understanding.

Fairness does not require giving equal weight to claims that are unsupported, demonstrably false, or contradicted by reliable evidence.

Independence From Official Narratives

Statements from governments, law-enforcement bodies, companies, advocacy groups, and other institutions are treated as claims requiring appropriate attribution and verification.

Official status does not make a statement automatically true. Political convenience does not make it automatically false.

We apply the same standard of evidence regardless of the country, institution, political affiliation, or public reputation of the subject.

Crime and Legal Proceedings

A person accused, charged, or investigated is not described as guilty unless guilt has been established by a competent court.

We distinguish clearly between:

• allegation;
• investigation;
• charge;
• trial;
• conviction;
• appeal;
• final judgment.

Legal terminology should be used accurately, and the current status of proceedings should be stated where relevant.

Privacy, Harm, and Public Interest

We balance the public interest in publication against the potential harm to individuals.

Public interest may include reporting that:

• exposes corruption, crime, deception, or serious misconduct;
• protects public health or safety;
• reveals significant failures of public institutions;
• identifies misuse of public money or authority;
• contributes to accountability and informed public debate.

Public curiosity alone is not necessarily a public interest.

We avoid publishing unnecessary private information, particularly where it concerns children, victims, private individuals, or people in vulnerable circumstances.

Children and Vulnerable People

We apply additional care when reporting on minors, victims of violence, people at risk of retaliation, and individuals who may not fully understand the consequences of publication.

Names, images, locations, or identifying details may be withheld where publication could cause disproportionate harm.

Consent from a parent or guardian does not automatically remove the need for an independent public-interest assessment.

Images, Video, and Audio

Visual and audio materials must not be presented in a misleading way.

We do not alter documentary images, recordings, or video in a manner that changes their factual meaning.

Cropping, colour correction, noise reduction, translation, subtitles, and other technical adjustments may be used where they do not distort the underlying material.

Illustrations, reconstructions, composite images, and AI-generated visuals must be clearly labelled when they could otherwise be mistaken for documentary evidence.

Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence tools may assist with limited technical or administrative tasks, but they do not replace editorial judgment, original reporting, or human verification.

We do not use AI to:

• invent facts, quotations, sources, or documents;
• create evidence;
• make unsupported accusations;
• publish material without human editorial review;
• imitate a real person in a misleading way.

Confidential source material and sensitive unpublished information should not be entered into public AI systems unless appropriate safeguards have been approved.

Where the use of AI materially affects how published content was created, we disclose it when relevant.

Corrections and Updates

We correct material factual errors promptly and transparently.

Depending on the nature of the change, we may:

• correct the text;
• add an editor’s note;
• update the publication with new information;
• clarify wording that could be misunderstood;
• publish a separate correction;
• withdraw material in exceptional circumstances.

Minor typographical, grammatical, or formatting changes that do not affect meaning may be corrected without a formal notice.

Substantive corrections should explain what was inaccurate and what has been changed. We do not silently remove or alter significant errors.

An update that adds new information does not necessarily mean that the original publication was inaccurate. Where appropriate, updates and corrections will be identified separately.

Requests for correction should identify the relevant publication, the disputed statement, and any supporting evidence. The procedure for submitting and reviewing correction requests is explained in our Corrections and Complaints Policy.

Removal and Unpublishing

Published material is not removed simply because it is inconvenient, critical, old, or appears prominently in search results.

Removal may be considered where:

• the publication is fundamentally inaccurate;
• continued publication creates a serious and disproportionate risk;
• there is a compelling legal or ethical reason;
• the material cannot be corrected adequately;
• the public-interest justification no longer outweighs the harm.

Where appropriate, updating, anonymising, adding context, or removing unnecessary personal details may be considered instead of complete removal.

External Contributions

Guest contributors and partner organisations must follow these standards when producing material for Project Truth International.

We disclose significant external affiliations or interests where they are relevant to the subject matter.

Publication by Project Truth International does not necessarily mean that every opinion expressed by a contributor represents the institutional position of the publication.

Partnerships and Collaborative Investigations

Collaborative investigations may involve the exchange of documents, research, data, and editorial findings with trusted partners.

Before publication, Project Truth International remains responsible for applying its own standards to material published under its name.

Partners may reach different editorial conclusions from the same evidence. Any material disagreement relevant to readers should not be concealed.

Plagiarism and Attribution

We do not present the work of others as our own.

Information, reporting, images, research, and documents obtained from other publications or researchers must be attributed where appropriate.

Commonly known facts do not require attribution, but exclusive findings, distinctive analysis, quotations, and original research do.

Editorial Review

The level of editorial and legal review depends on the complexity and risk of the material.

Investigations involving serious allegations, confidential sources, leaked data, national security, sanctions, organised crime, or significant privacy concerns may require enhanced editorial review and, where appropriate, independent legal advice.

No journalist or contributor may guarantee publication before the review process is complete.

Complaints

Project Truth International accepts complaints concerning possible factual errors, misleading presentation, privacy, fairness, the right of reply, and potential breaches of these Editorial Standards.

Complaints are reviewed in good faith and assessed against the evidence, the published material, these standards, and applicable law. Disagreement with the subject, tone, interpretation, or conclusions of a publication does not by itself establish a breach.

Detailed instructions for submitting a complaint, the information required, the review process, and the possible outcomes are set out in our Corrections and Complaints Policy.

Contact

Questions concerning these standards may be submitted through our Contact page.

Please clearly identify the nature of your enquiry so that it can be directed to the responsible member of our editorial team.

Changes to These Standards

These standards may be updated as our work, methods, technologies, and legal responsibilities develop.

The current version will always be published on this page.