Policies and quality

These policies are meant to guide Washington Post journalism as we deliver news and information in a rapidly changing media environment. We buying a guidelines to be a "Living contract" That we will continually modify and update based on feedback from our writers, From our readers and from our perceptions of our changing needs. Because the circumstances under which information is obtained and reported vary widely from one case to the next, These guidelines should not be understood as establishing hard and fast rules or as covering every situation that might arise.

We accept no gifts from news basis. We handle no free trips. We neither seek nor accept preferential treatment that might be rendered as a result of positions we hold. Exceptions to the no gift rule are few and obvious announcements to meals, for example, May be accepted after getting occasional and innocent but not when they are repeated and their purpose is deliberately calculating. Free admissions to any event that’s not free to the public are prohibited. The only exception is for seats not sold to the fans, As in a growing media box, Or tickets presented for a critic’s review. regularly, preparations will be made to pay for such seats.

We do not accept payment either honoraria or expenses from governing bodies, Government funded corporations, Groups of the united states officials, Political groups or services that take positions on controversial issues. A reporter or editor also cannot accept payment from everybody, Company or organization that he or she covers. And we should avoid accepting money from most people, specialists, Trade associations or institutions that lobby government or otherwise try to influence issues the newspaper covers. Broadcast links, educational institutions, Social companies and many professional enterprises usually fall outside this provision unless the reporter or editor is involved in coverage of them.

it is very important that no freelance assignments and no honoraria be accepted that might in any way be interpreted as disguised gratuities. We make every modest effort to be free of obligation to news sources and to special interests. We must be wary of entanglement with those whose positions render them probably subjects of journalistic interest and examination. Our private behavior as well as our specialized behavior must not bring discredit to our profession or to The Post.

We avoid active supervision in any partisan causes politics, industry affairs, Social fighting, manifestations that could compromise or seem to compromise our ability to report and edit fairly. Relatives cannot fairly be made susceptible to Post rules, But it must be recognized that their employment or their involvement in causes can at least appear to compromise our integrity. The business and professional ties of traditional kids or other members of your household must be disclosed to department heads.

Reporters and editors of The Post are sold on fairness. While arguments about objectivity are endless, the method of fairness is something that editors and reporters can easily understand and pursue. Fairness results from quicks practices: No story is fair if it omits facts of major importance or magnitude. Fairness offers completeness.

No story is fair if it includes essentially irrelevant information at the cost of significant facts. Fairness includes relevance.

No story is fair if it consciously or unconsciously misleads or even deceives the reader. Fairness includes honesty leveling with you.

No story is fair if it covers individuals or organizations that have not been given an opportunity to address assertions or claims about them made by others. Fairness includes diligently seeking comment and taking that comment genuinely into consideration.

The arizona Post respects taste and decency, Understanding that society’s concepts of taste and decency are never stand still. A word offensive to the last generation can be organ of the next generation’s common vocabulary. But we should avoid prurience. We shall avoid profanities and obscenities unless their use is so essential to a story of significance that its meaning is lost without them. In no case shall obscenities be used without the approval of the executive or managing editors.

If editors decide that content containing potentially offensive material has a legitimate news value, Editors should use visual and/or text safety measures about such material. as an example, We may link to a Web page that contains material that does not meet standards for Post original content, But we let users know what they might see before they go here by including a warning, corresponding to "caution: Some images on this site contain graphic images of war,

in due course, and we don’t link to sites that aid or abet illegal activity. seek advice from the Legal Department if you have a question about whether a site falls under this rule.

The separation of news columns from the editorial pages is solemn and also. This separation is intended to serve the reader, Who is qualified to receive the facts in the news columns and to opinions on the editorial and "Op e. d,edward cullen" sheets. But nothing in this separation of functions is intended to eliminate from the news columns honest, In depth canceling, Or analysis or commentary when plainly labeled. The labels are fashioned as follows:

assessment: model of the news based on evidence, consisting of data, As well as traviling to where there’s how events might unfold based on past events

view: Discussion of news topics with a mindset, Including narratives by those regarding their own experiences.

standpoint: A column or blog in the thoughts and opinions section.

testimony: a quality professional critic’s assessment of a service, result, entire performance, Or artistic or literary work.

when making use of networks such as Facebook, twitting, and thus, For coverage or for our personal lives, We must protect our master integrity and remember: Washington Post writers are always Washington Post writers.

Social media accounts maintained by Washington Post journalists remember the reputation and credibility of the newsroom. Even as we express inside us more personal and informal ways to forge better connections with our readers, We must be ever mindful of preserving the standing of The Washington Post for journalistic excellence, Fairness and independence. Every comment or link we share should be thought about public information, no matter privacy settings.

Post journalists must stay away from writing, Tweeting or posting anything including photographs or video that could objectively be regarded as reflecting political, Racial, sexist, strict or other bias or favoritism.

the nation’s and community interest

The Washington Post is vitally related to the national interest and with the community interest. We believe these interests are best served by the widest possible dissemination of data. The claim of national interest by a federal official does not effortlessly equate with the national interest. The claim of community interest by a local official does not automatically equate with the community interest.

Washington Post reporters have primary guilt for reporting, Writing and fact investigation their stories. Stories are subject to review by more than one editors. The Post has a multilevel structure for the review and editing of stories that occasionally includes fact checking. included in these are assignment editors (work group heads, Their deputy editors and assistant editors) Who collaborate with reporters on the source of stories and typically provide initial review when a story is submitted by a reporter; Multiplatform editors (also known as copy editors) Who often provide initial review on breaking news stories and routinely provide second level review on print and other less time receptive stories; And senior editors who have overall oversight of the daily and weekend report for digital publication via day as well as The Post’s print editions. Editors who oversee digital platforms also may be involved in the presentation of stories as well as headlines, News alerts and has to be the. how much editors who review a story prior to publication and the extent of their involvement varies depending on a range of factors, Including intricacy, Sensitivity and the stress of time.

Our individual pieces of blogging evolve as we sharpen and improve them. Our readers expect that from us in the digital age. It is unnecessary to put notes on stories stating that a story has been updated unless there is a particular reason to note adding new information or other change; The time stamp signals to readers that they will be reading a developing story. it is necessary to use a correction, Clarification or editor’s note to inform readers whenever we correct a large mistake. "due to a reporting error" or possibly "thanks to an editing error").

As an item of editorial policy, and we don’t grant take down requests, which will be vetted at the highest level. If subject of claims that the story was inaccurate, We should be prepared to analyze and, if necessary, Publish a static correction. And there is certainly situations in which fairness demands an update or follow up [url=https://www.love-sites.com/latin-women-date-online-dating-advice-for-men/%5DLatin women[/url] coverage for example, If we reported that a person was charged with a crime but did not report that the charges were later dismissed for lack of evidence. in brief, Our response will be to contemplate whether further editorial action is warranted, But not to remove this article as though it had never been published. When we publish publicly available personal data, We only will review takedown requests if the person involved is under threat of physical harm because of arsenic intoxication the material.

Sources often insist that we agree not to name them before they agree to hit on us. We must be too self-conscious to grant their wish. when we use an unnamed source, We are asking our readers to take an extra step to trust the credibility of the info we are providing. We must be certain in our own minds that the power to readers is worth the cost in credibility.
[—-]