1. Editorial independence
No political affiliations
We are committed to editorial decisions made solely in the public interest. Our content is free from the influence of any political party, government, private interest group, or sponsor. Team members, including fact-checkers and editors, do not hold leadership positions in political parties or receive compensation from political campaigns or partisan entities.
Evidence-based journalism
Our reporting and fact-checking rely exclusively on verifiable, scientific, and journalistic standards. We draw from peer-reviewed research, medical institutions, and qualified experts to ensure accuracy and integrity. We do not amplify unproven or ideologically driven claims.
Separation of editorial and financial functions
We maintain a clear and firm separation between our editorial team and any business or funding activities. Editorial content is never influenced by financial decisions or partner expectations.
2. Funding and transparency
No political funding
We do not accept financial support from political parties, candidates, or elected officials. Indirect support (e.g., through grants from neutral nonprofits) is transparently disclosed.
Donor transparency
We publicly list our major sources of funding above a designated threshold on our website. If a funder has known political affiliations or potential conflicts, we will clearly disclose that context.
Editorial autonomy guaranteed
No donor, funder, or partner has the right to preview, alter, or approve our editorial work. Financial contributions do not influence our fact-checking methodology or verdicts.
3. Staff conduct and guidelines
Ethical commitments
All staff and contributors sign a code of ethics affirming their commitment to neutrality, accuracy, and transparency.
Restrictions on political activity
To maintain the integrity of our work, team members may not publicly endorse political candidates or participate in partisan campaigns in their capacity as representatives of our organization.
Conflict of interest policy
Staff must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest, including financial ties, past employment, or affiliations that may compromise neutrality. If such a conflict exists, the individual is excluded from related editorial work.
4. Fact-checking standards
Claim selection
We select claims for verification based on their virality, potential for harm, and relevance to public interest regarding cancer and public health. The origin of a claim is not a factor in its eligibility for fact-checking.
Source quality
We only cite reputable sources: peer-reviewed research, public health agencies, academic experts, and evidence-based databases. Anecdotes, partisan content, or lobby-driven materials are not accepted as sufficient proof.
Verdict categories
We rate claims using a consistent framework such as True, False, Misleading, or Unproven based on the available evidence. Each verdict is accompanied by transparent reasoning and supporting references.
5. Corrections and updates
Accuracy first
We regularly review published fact-checks and update them if new evidence becomes available or if factual errors are identified.
Transparent corrections
Any changes to published content include a visible correction notice explaining what was changed and why. We maintain version archives to ensure accountability.
Community feedback
We welcome readers’ input and review all reported concerns. If a correction is warranted, we act swiftly to amend the record.
6. Appeals and right of reply
Appeal process
If individuals or organizations believe they were misrepresented or inaccurately assessed, they may submit a formal request for review. All appeals are evaluated using the same editorial standards and verification process.
Right of reply
We offer space for evidence-based responses from those named in our fact-checks, provided the response does not perpetuate disinformation or violate our editorial standards.
7. Policy review and continuous improvement
Annual review
This policy is reviewed annually to reflect evolving challenges in the information ecosystem, including new health threats, media trends, or regulatory shifts.
Stakeholder engagement
We invite feedback from readers, experts, and peer organizations to strengthen our practices and uphold the highest standards of fact-checking and journalism.