Dissenting Citizen exists to report important developments, examine the evidence behind them and explore what individual stories may mean when viewed together.
Our aim is not to tell readers what to think. It is to give them enough reliable information to make up their own minds.
Accuracy
Accuracy comes before speed.
We aim to verify consequential factual claims before publication and use reliable sources appropriate to the story. Where primary material is available – including official documents, court judgments, company statements, datasets and original research – we prefer to examine and link to it.
Information that cannot be independently confirmed is identified as such.
If the facts do not support the most dramatic interpretation of a story, we do not publish that interpretation as fact.
Sources
We link to the sources behind our reporting wherever practicable so readers can inspect the evidence themselves.
Sources may include primary documents, official statements, established news organisations, specialist publications, academic research and other material relevant to the story.
We consider the reliability, proximity and interests of a source rather than assuming that any source is automatically authoritative.
Anonymous or unverified claims are treated with appropriate caution.
Allegations and uncertainty
An allegation is not a fact simply because somebody has made it.
Where claims are disputed, we aim to make that clear and represent material responses fairly. Where important facts remain unknown, we say so rather than filling the gap with speculation.
We distinguish between what the available evidence establishes, what it suggests and what remains uncertain.
Reporting and opinion
Dissenting Citizen distinguishes news reporting from opinion and analysis.
News articles aim to report developments accurately and provide the context necessary to understand them.
The Dissent is our opinion and analysis series. It connects developments we have been following, examines the evidence around them and advances an argument or asks a larger question arising from the reporting.
Opinion does not remove the obligation to be accurate. Factual claims within opinion pieces are held to the same standard as factual claims elsewhere on the site.
Independence
Dissenting Citizen is owned and funded by its editor. It does not rely on external funding and is not affiliated with a political party.
Editorial decisions are not made on behalf of political parties, governments, corporations, campaign groups or advertisers.
Advertising, affiliate relationships or other commercial arrangements will not determine our editorial conclusions. Where a relationship could reasonably be relevant to a reader’s assessment of an article, it should be disclosed.
Independence is useless if it merely means choosing a different tribe.
Fairness
Questioning an account does not mean assuming it is false.
Governments, corporations, institutions, campaigners and individuals can all provide accurate information. They can also have interests that influence how information is selected or presented.
We examine claims on their evidence rather than accepting or rejecting them because of who made them.
Where criticism concerns an identifiable person or organisation, we aim to include relevant context and material responses where appropriate.
Headlines and images
Headlines should accurately reflect the substance of the article.
We do not deliberately use a headline that materially exaggerates what the underlying reporting establishes.
Illustrative and AI-generated imagery may be used where appropriate. Such imagery is intended to represent the subject of an article, not to be presented as photographic evidence of an event that did not occur.
Artificial intelligence
Dissenting Citizen uses artificial intelligence as part of its research, production and publishing workflow.
AI does not remove editorial responsibility. The publication remains responsible for what it publishes.
Material factual claims should be supported by appropriate sources, and AI-generated output should not be treated as evidence merely because an AI system produced it.
Corrections
We correct material factual errors when they are identified.
Our approach to corrections, clarifications and updates is set out in our Corrections Policy.
Our standard
Readers do not have to agree with Dissenting Citizen.
They should, however, be able to distinguish fact from allegation, reporting from opinion and evidence from inference – and see how we reached our conclusions.