...

We intend to build audience trust rapidly in our contributor content, by ensuring unbiased and fair reporting.

This content will As creators, our content must adhere to the basic journalistic standards of truth, accuracy, balance, and impartiality.

We prohibit the use of defamatory and libelous content. We do not permit any harmful, offensive, or obscene content. We do not tolerate racism or hate speech, neither do we allow extremely violent or graphic content, or content that includes threats of violence or incitement to commit acts of violence towards any group or individual. Any such submitted content will be removed and the user banned for life.

...

It is the responsibility of the contributor to ensure that the stories they upload do not contain prohibited and illegal content and that it adheres to both the Unpress editorial standards and the community standards.

As contributors that create stories, we approach each story with the following basic principles:

• We do not promote any third-party organization, including businesses and their products, also religious and charitable groups.

• We do not produce stories that have

...

• a political affiliation, nor do we endorse any political candidates or parties.

• We see the world as it is and we report the facts with honesty and integrity.

If you see anything on our site that is inaccurate, harmful, or offensive, you can report your findings to the administrator by filling out this form.

Accuracy

All contributors must ensure the accuracy of their content. This means double checking facts and not relying on a single source to verify a story. Rumor and hearsay are not facts. We only report what we can best determine is the truth. Anything less could be extremely damaging to innocent individuals we malign. It will also erode audience trust and may have dire legal implications.

...

If a contributor to Unpress is offered video or any other material to stand up a story, we must be able to verify its accuracy and attribute the source. If we cannot verify it’s accuracy, then the source must be attributed and we must state that we have not been able to verify accuracy.

Ordinarily, contributors should avoid anonymous sources, especially if their stories are not easily verified. However, if we do decide to grant anonymity to a source, be aware that this is a serious undertaking, and every effort must be made to protect their identity. We must also ensure the audience understands the reason for the anonymity and given just enough information to establish the credibility of the source, without revealing their identity.

...

The ability to maintain trust and to operate as an objective journalist or storyteller, even to remain safe working as a journalist, demands strict adherence to these editorial guidelines. Any whiff of bias, in any direction in a news story, will destroy your credibility and therefore the your ability to report on a story.

Impartiality is not the same as balance. In normal reporting we would expect both sides of a story to be represented, or a ‘right of reply’ to be given. However, if a story is incontrovertibly true, then balance is not necessarily required. For example, the mounting scientific proof that the planet is warming and that the incidence of unnatural events such as extreme heat and devastating floods is growing exponentially, tells us that climate change is real. As such, a story about climate change does not technically require being balanced with an opposing view.

We do not tolerate so called handle conspiracy theories , which, with care. Conspiracy theories by their nature, lack evidential proof, nor do we accept any medical or scientific theories or conspiracies that do not have a foundation in scientific fact. You can report on them, but you must do so in a way that does not subscribe to, endorse, support, promote or advocate for them.

Impartiality does not mean a contributor must adopt a submissive tone when interviewing a subject. Indeed, tough questions and holding the powerful to account is expected of all journalists. In such circumstances, the journalist is there on behalf of the audience and must ask the necessary and appropriate questions.

...

As stated in the introduction above, we do not permit harmful, offensive or obscene content. We do not tolerate racism or hate speech of any kind, neither do we allow extremely violent content, or content that includes threats of violence or incitement to commit acts of violence towards any group or individual.

Having said that, we recognize that the publication of ‘challenging’ content, which passes the public interest test and has editorial purpose, and which seeks only to prompt legitimate and fair public debate, is permissible. Our moderators will determine whether content meets this narrow interpretation; the public interest bar will be set extremely high.

...

There is NO justification for the depiction or discussion of sex involving minors. Such references and depictions are strictly prohibited and illegal. Any infringement or attempted infringement of this prohibition will be reported immediately to the required law enforcement authorities and result in a permanent ban for the user and potential prosecution. For more information see our policy on Exploitation.

...

This does not mean that faith groups can’t be challenged, especially when there is a clear public interest case for doing so. However, mocking religion or a person’s spiritual beliefs for its own sake, is not permitted¹. This is particularly relevant when depicting or talking about religious imagery and ritual. For example, many Muslims regard any depiction of the Prophet Muhammad as highly offensive. 

...

The legal expectation of privacy differs from country to country. However, privacy is an integral component of our community standards, which determines that we respect individual privacy.

...

However, there may be a small number of occasions when privacy can be breached in the case of exposing crime and wrongdoing, and the public interest case is very clear.

We do NOT condone breaking the law, and any examples of such infringement will result in a ban from the site.

...

Secret filming is illegal in many countries and should be avoided. However, within the legal confines of the individual jurisdiction, secret recording can be acceptable in a very small number of cases. Firstly, there must be clear prime facie evidence of illegality and wrongdoing on the part of the subject. There should be a self-evident public interest case for exposure. Secondly, every attempt to record the subject openly must have been made. Thirdly, the subject must be given at least two written requests for interview. If all these attempts fail, and the public interest test still applies, the secret filming can take place.

...

Reporting distressing scenes

The gratuitous depiction of violent scenes, or graphic portrayal of those seriously injured or killed by acts of hate, war, terrorism, natural disasters, or accidents, are not permitted.

...

As always, there are a small number of occasions when public interest permits the showing of distressing images. For example, images of war zones to indicate the intensity of fighting or the devastating effects on civilians may be in the public interest to show. Great care and consideration is required when making such picture decisions.

...

Please remember that any individual or business can take legal action against you and us if they feel their reputation is damaged or that their business has suffered as a result of the content we you published.

The first defense against such a charge is TRUTH - ie the content was true. However, even if you know something to be true, it may be difficult to prove in court.

Make sure that what you upload is legitimate and true. Falling foul of libel and defamation laws will have serious , financial implications for everyone.

Court Orders, Reporting Restrictions and Contempt

...