Editorial Standards

Each material fact needs evidence we can point to on request.

Writers describe a source’s substance, status and context faithfully. A quotation is never shortened in a way that shifts its meaning.

Anything we cannot reasonably verify is not presented as settled.

A line can be literally true and still leave the wrong impression. We judge accuracy by the picture a reader takes away, not just sentence by sentence.

We avoid any phrasing that quietly turns a claim into a fact. Someone who has been:

• accused is not, for that reason, liable;
• sued has not, for that reason, lost;
• charged has not been convicted;
• investigated has not, for that reason, done wrong.

When a case is still running, we say so — prominently, not in a footnote.

Titles, headlines, search snippets, social posts and captions must fairly reflect the record beneath them. A careful paragraph lower down cannot rescue a misleading headline.

We do not reach for sensational wording to win clicks or rankings.

Labels such as scammer, fraudster, criminal, thief or corrupt — and anything like them — are never applied as a statement of fact to a named person or company unless a competent court or authority has decided the matter and the evidence supports that exact wording.

Where a claim comes from a complaint, a prosecutor, a regulator, a litigant, a witness or another source, we say so wherever readers need that to judge its weight:

Attribution is never dropped to make a line sound sharper.

Adverse information is published with the context that stops it painting a false picture, which can include:

A matter the record shows has been resolved is not presented as if it were still live.

Where it is reasonably practical and appropriate, we give the subject enough detail to understand the main adverse points and a fair opportunity to answer before publication.

The time allowed depends on how complex and how urgent the matter is.

Replies and any evidence sent with them are considered before we publish. Sending a reply does not oblige us to accept it — and not replying is never treated as an admission.

We may trim a response for length, relevance, repetition, legal exposure, privacy or clarity instead of printing it word for word.

We will not cut it in a way that distorts the subject’s position. Documents sent with a response that change the record are assessed before publication.

Appearing in a document is not reason enough to name someone. Editors weigh:

• the part the person played;
• whether naming them serves a genuine public interest;
• how strong the evidence is;
• their privacy and any vulnerability;
• foreseeable harm;
• any reporting restriction;
• whether readers need the name to follow the record.

Private individuals with a minor role get particular care.

Children, victims, witnesses and vulnerable people receive extra protection.

Their names, images, addresses and identifying details are not published simply because they can be found elsewhere. Court restrictions and legal protections for victims and minors are always respected.

Researchers often hold information that has no place in public.

Home addresses, private numbers, personal email, Emirates ID or passport numbers, bank details, information about children and other sensitive data stay out unless publication is lawful, necessary and justified by a substantial public interest.

The record carries what readers need to understand the matter — not everything that was found.

Photos, screenshots, charts and other visuals must not suggest anything the evidence does not support, and are never altered in a way that changes what they show.

Illustrations and stock images are never presented so they could pass for documentary evidence. Captions state plainly what an image does and does not establish.

Our reporters and investigators may lawfully use:

We never approve hacking, unauthorised computer access, theft, bribery, trespass, unlawful surveillance, unlawful impersonation or invented evidence. Any unusual technique that raises legal or ethical concerns is reviewed before it is used.

Once research and verification have reached the right stage, the writer is given the evidence needed to prepare the record. Their task is not to heighten it but to set out clearly:

• what happened;
• what is claimed;
• what is documented;
• what has been decided;
• what the subject says; and
• what is still unknown or disputed.

The story stays within those boundaries.

Material investigations may, where required, include review in the UAE and in other jurisdictions involved before publication, under our internal procedures. That review can look at:

It supports editorial judgment; it never replaces it.

Writers, researchers, editors and reviewers must declare any personal, financial, professional or other interest touching a subject.

Where an interest could reasonably cast doubt on the work, the person steps back or the conflict is otherwise properly managed.

When a source is in a business or personal dispute with a subject, that is factored into how far we rely on them.

Read the conflict register

We take no payment, gift, favour or other benefit from a subject in return for:

Research Membership carries no editorial say. A member’s evidence is assessed exactly like anyone else’s.

When a material statement turns out to be wrong, we fix it promptly. When new evidence changes the picture rather than disproving it, we update the record.

Material corrections are made openly where appropriate. Their purpose is an accurate record — not to minimise our mistake.

Automated tools and AI may help sort documents, search, translate between Arabic, English and other languages, match names to entities or flag possible leads.

Output from an AI system is not evidence because a machine produced it. Any material fact surfaced that way is checked against reliable sources before publication.

AI is never used to invent quotes, sources, interviews, documents or evidence. People — not software — answer for what we publish.

Pages may be structured so records are easy to find and understand in search engines and elsewhere.

That is never a reason to exaggerate. Titles, descriptions, structured data and summaries meet the same accuracy and attribution rules as the record itself.

Material records can show when they were published, when they were last reviewed and how they have changed.

Where later events alter what an earlier, accurate statement means, the statement is not left standing without explanation.