Editorial Standards & Corrections

1. Purpose of this code

A publication that reports on money should be legible about its own methods. This code sets out how we work. It is not decorative: contributors are commissioned on these terms, and readers are invited to complain when we fall short of them.

2. Independence

Editorial decisions are taken by the editor alone. No advertiser, commercial partner, investor or source has any right of prior review over an article, and none is granted one. Copy is never shown to a subject before publication except where narrowly necessary to check a technical fact, and then only the specific passage in question, never the framing or the conclusions.

3. Sourcing and verification

• Primary documents first: filings, permits, assay certificates, customs data, central bank statistical releases, court records and audited accounts outrank commentary about them.
• Two-source rule: a contested factual claim central to a story requires at least two independent sources, or one document plus one corroborating source.
• Named sources are the default. Anonymity is granted only where a source faces a credible risk of retaliation, prosecution or dismissal, is approved by the editor, and is explained to the reader in the text.
• Numbers are checked against their original release, not against a secondary report of it. Units, currencies and time periods are stated explicitly — troy ounces and metric tonnes are not interchangeable, and we do not let them blur.
• Photographs are captioned with what they show and where they were taken. We do not stage news images or use stock imagery in a way that implies it documents a specific reported event.

4. Right of reply

Any person or organisation facing significant criticism in an article is put on notice of the substance of that criticism before publication and given a reasonable opportunity to respond. Reasonable means proportionate: longer for a complex investigation, shorter for a fast-moving market story. Responses are reflected fairly in the piece; a refusal to comment is reported as such, without insinuation.

5. Use of artificial intelligence

We do not publish machine-generated articles under a human byline, and we do not publish machine-generated articles at all. Language models may be used internally for mechanical tasks — transcribing an interview, searching a document set, tidying a subheading — always under the review of the named author, who remains fully responsible for every word published.

No AI system is used to fabricate quotations, synthesise sources, generate photorealistic images presented as documentary photography, or produce data that is not traceable to a real underlying release. Illustrative imagery that is not documentary is labelled in its caption.

6. Corrections

We correct errors promptly, visibly and without defensiveness. The scale of the remedy matches the error.

• Typographical or formatting slips are fixed silently.
• Factual errors are fixed in the text and disclosed in a dated correction note at the foot of the article, stating what was wrong and what it now says.
• Errors that change the meaning of a story carry a note at the top of the article as well as at the foot.
• Where an article is withdrawn, the URL is retained and serves an explanation rather than a dead link. We do not quietly delete published journalism.

7. Complaints procedure

Send complaints to the editorial desk, quoting the article URL, the passage complained of and the evidence relied upon. We acknowledge within three working days and aim to resolve within fourteen. If you remain dissatisfied, you may escalate to the editor for a final written decision, which will set out our reasoning in full.

8. Protection of sources

The confidentiality of a source who has been promised it is absolute. We resist disclosure demands by every lawful means available, and we design our handling of sensitive material so that there is as little to disclose as possible. Whistleblowers in refining, mining and bullion banking are encouraged to make contact through channels they control, from equipment that is not their employer's.

Practically, that means we keep contact records apart from published material, we do not retain drafts that identify a source once a story is out, and we prefer a conversation that leaves no durable trace to one that is convenient for us. A source who asks to be forgotten is forgotten.

9. Commissioning and who writes what

Stories are commissioned against a beat, not against a traffic target. Each desk — history, industry, markets, craft and mining — is owned by a named reporter whose background is published on their contributor page, and an editor who is accountable for what runs. We do not hand a refining story to a generalist because the refining reporter is busy; we wait, or we do not publish.

Freelance commissions carry the same code as staff work. A contributor who cannot meet the sourcing standard is paid a kill fee rather than pressed to file something thinner. No article is published because it was expensive to produce.

10. Language, units and quotation

• Quotations are verbatim within the bounds of ordinary speech tidying: repeated words and verbal tics may be removed, meaning may not be altered, and an ellipsis marks any excision inside a quoted sentence.
• Translated quotations are marked as translations, and the original wording is available on request where a nuance is contested.
• Units are stated in full on first use — troy ounce, metric tonne, gram per tonne — and conversions are given where a reader could reasonably misread the scale of a figure.
• Percentages state their base. A thirty per cent fall from a record high and a thirty per cent fall over a decade are different claims and are written differently.
• Loaded market vocabulary — surge, collapse, safe haven — is used sparingly and only where the underlying move justifies it against a stated reference period.

11. Reader data, campaigns and advocacy

We report on campaigns against irresponsible sourcing, on industry lobbying, and on regulators. We join none of them. Staff do not sign open letters on subjects they cover, do not accept board or advisory positions in the sector, and do not speak at events organised by a company they report on unless the appearance is unpaid, on the record and disclosed.

Readers who contact us with documents are treated as sources, not as leads to be resold. We never pass reader correspondence, contact details or tip-offs to a third party, commercial or otherwise.

12. Archive integrity

The archive is a record, not a marketing asset. Published URLs stay live. We do not silently rewrite history to make an old call look better, we do not de-index a piece because a subject asked, and we do not sell the removal of coverage.

Where the law requires an alteration — a court order, a data-protection erasure obligation that we cannot lawfully resist — the article carries a visible note recording that a change was compelled, to the fullest extent the order permits us to say so.

13. Numbers, statistics and charts

Every figure we publish is traceable to a named source, and where a series is compiled from more than one source we say so and explain the join. We do not launder an estimate into a fact by dropping the qualifier in the second reference.

Charts start their vertical axis at zero unless there is a stated analytical reason not to, in which case the truncation is labelled. We do not change axis scales between comparable charts in the same piece, we do not smooth a series without saying we have, and we do not present a nominal price series across decades without also giving the real terms figure or explaining why nominal is the relevant measure.

14. Anonymous sourcing

Anonymity is granted for a reason, not as a courtesy. The reasons we accept are a credible risk to employment, safety, or legal position, or a contractual restriction that would prevent an otherwise legitimate disclosure. Convenience, message discipline and a wish to attack a competitor without attribution are not reasons.

Where we grant anonymity, the piece describes the source with as much specificity as safety allows — 'a reserve manager at a G20 central bank', not 'a source' — and states why the name is withheld. At least one editor who is not the reporter knows the identity of every anonymous source in every published piece.

15. Verification of documents and images

Documents supplied to us are verified before publication, not after. Where possible we confirm a document with a second party who would independently know of its existence, check its internal consistency and metadata, and put its substance to the organisation it came from before we publish.

• Photographs are used only where provenance is established; we state when an image is a file photograph rather than a picture of the specific scene described.
• Images are not composited, and adjustments are limited to global tone, exposure and cropping that does not alter meaning.
• Where an illustration is a reconstruction or a diagram rather than a photograph, the caption says so.
• We do not use synthetic or AI-generated imagery to depict a real event, place or person.

16. Financial interests and gifts

Anyone writing for this publication discloses to the editor any holding in a gold miner, royalty company, refiner, exchange-traded product or dealer that could reasonably be affected by their reporting. Where a holding exists and the assignment proceeds, the interest is disclosed in the piece.

We do not accept paid travel, accommodation or hospitality from companies we cover. Site visits are paid for by the publication. Where physical access to a mine, refinery or vault can only be arranged through the operator — which is frequently the case, since these are secure industrial sites — the piece states who arranged access and who paid for it.

Gifts of any value beyond ordinary refreshment are declined or, where declining would cause offence, donated and recorded.

17. Coverage of individuals and reputational harm

Where reporting is likely to damage an identifiable person's reputation, we put the specific allegations to them in writing, in enough detail to allow a meaningful response, and we allow a reasonable period to reply — normally at least 48 hours, longer for complex matters where the person must consult records or counsel.

A refusal to comment is reported as a refusal to comment, without characterisation. A denial is reported alongside the allegation and given comparable prominence. We do not publish an allegation we would be unwilling to defend, and we do not use question marks to imply what we cannot state.

18. Accessibility and plain language

This publication is written for a reader with no background in monetary economics, metallurgy or mine finance. Technical terms are defined at first use, in the sentence rather than in a glossary the reader has to go and find. Where a concept can be explained without jargon, it is.

The site is built to be navigable by keyboard and readable by screen reader, images carry descriptive alternative text written by the person who chose the image, and colour is never the only means of conveying information. If you encounter a page that fails any of these, please tell us — accessibility defects are treated as production faults, not as feature requests.