Context is a format.

Start with a question

Every explainer should answer a real confusion: why something works differently in a place, what a policy changes, or which system sits behind a recurring headline. A keyword or a news spike is not enough reason to publish.

Source discipline

We prefer primary government, regulator, university, research institute, company filing, and official statistical sources. Established journalism and specialist commentary can add context, but they do not replace verification for important factual claims.

Source notes are part of the article. They show the reader where the explanation begins, what was checked, and which parts are our interpretation.

Separate fact from interpretation

We use direct language for documented facts and signpost analysis as analysis. When evidence is incomplete or contested, the article should say so. We do not hide uncertainty behind confident typography.

Historical material

Archive snapshots and old URLs can help us understand topic continuity and provenance. They are research evidence, not a content library. We do not copy old articles, authors, logos, or identity without confirmed rights and a legitimate editorial reason.

Corrections and updates

When a material error is found, we correct the page and explain the change on the corrections page. Dates, leaders, policies, and statistics can age; review dates and meaningful updates are visible in the article header.

AI and human review

AI can help organise research and identify maintenance work. It cannot approve a claim or publish on its own. Politics, health, finance, law, and geopolitics require a higher review standard.