How we source, verify and publish - and what to do when we get something wrong.
Trust in a young outlet is not assumed, it is built. These are the rules we hold ourselves to, published openly so you can hold us to them too.
Sourcing
Every factual claim in a VOTVS story is traceable to a named source, a document, or direct observation by our reporter. Where a source cannot be named - because naming them would put them at risk - we say so in the piece and explain the risk in general terms.
We do not publish single-source allegations against an identifiable person or organisation. We seek comment from anyone facing a substantive criticism, and we say plainly when they declined to respond.
Consent and dignity
People we interview are told what the story is about, where it will appear, and that they can decline. For subjects in vulnerable situations, we confirm consent again before publication.
We avoid imagery and language that reduces a person to their hardest moment. A photograph runs because it is necessary to the story, not because it is affecting.
Verification
Before publication, every piece goes through:
- A factual review against the reporter's notes and source material.
- A check of all names, dates, places and figures.
- A read for framing - are we describing this community as they would recognise themselves?
Corrections
We correct errors quickly and visibly. A correction notice stays at the foot of the story permanently, stating what was wrong and when it was fixed. We do not quietly edit a published piece to erase a mistake.
If you have spotted an error, write to us and we will look at it seriously.
Funding and independence
Sponsors and donors have no input into editorial decisions, no advance sight of stories, and no right of review. Where a story touches on a funder, we disclose the relationship inside the piece.
