How we work
Our standards are designed so you never have to take our word for anything.
Every fact has a source. We prefer original documents: laws, court rulings, official data, filings, recordings. We link them.
Documents first, and real cross-checks. A claim not backed by a primary document needs at least two independent sources, and we check that they really are independent: two people repeating the same press release count as one. A statement from a company or an official shows what they said, not that it is true, so we test it against other evidence. The more serious the allegation, the more evidence we need, and we say what we could not verify.
Evidence labels. Disputed points are marked as documented, claimed by [who], or disputed, so you can see how solid each point is. Where the evidence clearly contradicts a claim, we say so.
Neutral words. We avoid words that judge: no “shocking”, “slammed” or “so-called”. People “said”, “wrote” or “voted”.
Everyone in their own words. Anyone we name critically is asked to respond before we publish, and we say whether they did.
Numbers in context. Every figure comes with its source, date and comparison.
What we know, and what we don’t. Longer articles end by saying both.
Anonymous sources, rarely. Only when the information is vital, can’t be had any other way, and our editor knows who the source is.
Open corrections. If we get something wrong, we fix it visibly and say so. See our corrections policy.
We track our own balance. We log which countries, parties and viewpoints each story covers, and publish a summary every quarter. The first covers 3 November to 31 December 2026 and will be published in January 2027. A count alone can’t prove fairness, since some stories involve some parties more than others, so each summary also explains what the numbers do and don’t show.
These rules summarise our Editorial Code, which everyone producing content for GreenRose follows. The full Code is an internal document; you can ask for a copy at editor@greenrose.news.