Principles · editorial standards

Principles for public-interest reporting.

The goal is accountable reporting with a calm tone: documented sourcing, visible corrections, and privacy-aware handling when risk exists.

Stories Corrections Support (Tip)
Reader support does not buy coverage, outcomes, or favourable treatment. No charitable tax receipt.

1) Independence

  • Not aligned to parties, governments, or private interests.
  • Coverage decisions are editorial, based on public-interest value.
  • Supporters do not receive editorial influence or preferred outcomes.

2) Sourcing discipline

  • Prefer primary evidence: documents, records, direct observation.
  • Attribute clearly; separate what is known vs alleged vs inferred.
  • Keep language factual; avoid performative outrage.

5) Publishing safety rules (Red Lines)

WitnessBC publishes pattern-level reporting and explainers. To protect people, the following are non-negotiable.

  • No naming: no individuals, employers, agencies, or “hinted” identities.
  • No identifiers: no addresses, case numbers, immigration/employment identifiers, or private screenshots.
  • No allegations as facts: separate what is known vs alleged; do not present claims as proven without public documentation.
  • No doxxing by timeline: avoid exact dates/times that enable re-identification; use ranges.
  • No legal/clinical advice: general information only; route to official services where relevant.
  • No trauma marketing: avoid sensational detail; keep tone calm and prevention-oriented.
  • Consent + safety first: sensitive narratives require explicit consent and de-identification checks.
  • Corrections always: fix errors fast; log material changes and link from the story.
  • Conflict-of-interest boundary: reader support never buys coverage, outcomes, or favourable treatment.

6) De-identification checklist

  • Could a person recognize themselves immediately?
  • Could a coworker/employer identify them from role + city + timeframe?
  • Did we remove “unique” details (exact shift times, branch, niche team, rare event)?
  • Would publishing increase risk of retaliation, harassment, or doxxing?

If any answer is “yes”: rewrite to a broader pattern level, delay publication, or do not publish.

Funding and independence

Support keeps infrastructure and publishing capacity alive. It does not purchase coverage, protection, or retaliation.

  • Disclose meaningful conflicts where relevant.
  • Do not accept “pay-to-kill” or “pay-to-publish” arrangements.
  • Prefer simple, transparent support mechanisms (tips/membership) over opaque sponsorship.