EDITORIAL STANDARDS AND ETHICS
EDITORIAL STANDARDS AND ETHICS
STANDARDS AND ETHICS
NPQ envisions a world in which we live in an active democracy whose values are fully grounded in human rights, economic and social justice, racial equity, and thriving communities. Our mission is to advance conversations and practice in civil society—as manifested in nonprofits, social movements, and philanthropy.
To that end, NPQ subscribes to the standards of editorial excellence, independence, and transparency adopted by the Institute of Nonprofit News.
ETHICS
As a member of INN, NPQ follows the Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists. In short:
- We are committed to producing reporting that is accurate and fair.
- We respect the humanity of our subjects and sources and aim to minimize harm in our reporting.
- We are independent, working to fulfill our organizational mission and serve our community—the nonprofit sector—and the broader public. Our reporting is not influenced by payment or favors.
- We are open and honest with our audiences, ensuring our policies and practices are public. We acknowledge and correct our mistakes.
EXCELLENCE
We produce original, factual reporting that reflects the diversity of the communities we serve and prioritize stories that amplify people’s work to transform the world. Our journalism is built on a high level of community engagement and rooted in community experiences and needs. We support both trained reporters and field storytellers to amplify stories that are important to their communities.
INDEPENDENCE
We are committed to independence in our reporting and as an organization. Donors, advertisers, and other revenue sources do not have input on what we cover or how we report it.
As a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization, NPQ is politically independent, does not endorse specific political candidates, and abides by the Johnson Amendment and all other relevant legal statutes regarding political activity.
INTERDEPENDENCE
We are committed to being in regular conversation and dialogue with the nonprofits, philanthropies, movements, and organizations that we cover. We seek to connect our readers to advance conversation and improve practice in nonprofits, social movements, and philanthropy.
TRANSPARENCY
We retain full authority over editorial content to protect the best journalistic and business interests of our organization. We maintain a firewall between news coverage decisions and sources of all revenue and are committed to transparency of our funding sources. Acceptance of financial support does not constitute implied or actual endorsement of donors or their products, services, or opinions.
We accept gifts, grants, and sponsorships from individuals and organizations for the general support of our activities, but our news judgments are made independently and not on the basis of donor support.
Our organization may consider donations to support the coverage of particular topics, but we maintain editorial control of the coverage. We will cede no right of review or influence of editorial content, nor of unauthorized distribution of editorial content.
NPQ makes public all donors who give a total of $5,000 or more per year. We accept anonymous donations for general support only if it is clear that sufficient safeguards have been put in place that the expenditure of that donation is made independently by our organization and in compliance with INN’s Membership Standards.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
A detailed organizational conflict of interest policy is laid out in NPQ’s employee handbook. In editorial matters, if and when a conflict of interest—actual, potential, or perceived—arises, the managing editor must be made aware of the conflict and the issue must be addressed clearly in writing in the published work.
Examples of required disclosure:
- familial or close personal relationships between authors and sources This NPQ article provides a clear, straightforward example of acknowledging a familial relationship at the beginning of the piece.
- author’s or source’s professional relationships with NPQ, such as board membership
- financial interests that might influence reporting
- any relationships between authors and their subject matter, such as writing about the organization they work for, interviewing a source who serves on their organization’s board, and the like
Sources:
- Institute for Nonprofit News Sample Editorial Independence Policy
- Institute for Nonprofit News Membership Standards
- Mother Jones Editorial Independence Policy
- Project South Movement Journalism Principles
- The New York Times Ethical Journalism Handbook
ATTRIBUTION
Writers and editors affiliated with NPQ are responsible for appropriately attributing source material to its originator(s). Be as specific as possible about where information comes from: Avoid attributing to broad groups such as “experts;” name sources (though see our policy on Anonymity); and use neutral language in attribution (see below).
When using photographs, artwork, or other media in a story, ensure the creator is clearly and correctly credited and has granted explicit permission for the work to be used in the manner intended.
Categories of information that generally require attribution:
- Quotes
- New facts
- Accusations/allegations
- Disputed or controversial information
- Anything that’s not common knowledge
- Anything sweeping in nature
NEUTRAL LANGUAGE
In attribution, use neutral verbs like “says” or “notes.”
Ex: Smith, the CDC spokesperson, says this is the largest spike in the disease the agency has seen since 2020.
If you are fairly certain of the claim but cannot prove it, you may use more distancing words like “suggest” or “indicate.”
Ex: A new study suggests most nonprofit leaders are burned out.
Avoid more judgmental language like “claims,” unless you are intentionally casting doubt on the quote.
Ex: The president claims the problem was due to increased immigration, but actual job numbers show this is not the case.
Source: NPR
CORRECTIONS
NPQ will review every request for corrections. Where it is determined that a correction should be made, we will correct errors in material published online, in the magazine, and on social media. Corrections to content online should be fielded by the managing editor.
In making corrections, we do not attribute blame to individual writers or editors (such as, “because of a reporting error” or “because of an editing error”). But we may note that an error was the result of a production problem or because incorrect information came to us from a trusted source.
CORRECTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS
Proofing errors may be corrected without a note or explanation.
Small errors can be corrected and a note provided at the top of the article noting updated publication date.
Substantive corrections to an article, photo caption, headline, graphic, video or other material require a prompt correction and a note at the bottom of the article explaining the change. A note should also be provided at the top of the article noting updated publication date.
EDITOR’S NOTES
A significant correction involving the entire substance of an article, ethical matters, or reporting standards may require an editor’s note and further explanation. The issue may also require communication with the author. The editor in chief must approve the addition of an editor’s note to a story.
UNPUBLISH REQUESTS
In cases where we determine removal of a story is more appropriate than a correction, we will do so. There may be situations that require an update or follow-up to a story that was previously removed, for fairness or developing events. In those situations, an editorial note should provide clear context for the update.
ANONYMITY
NPQ respects contributors’ requests to publish with us anonymously as well as to use anonymous sources. We understand that there may be important reasons to maintain anonymity, such as protecting personal privacy, sensitive subject matter, employment, and/or concerns for safety and security. As such, we generally honor well-founded requests to publish anonymously or anonymize sources, following an editorial review of the matter. At least one NPQ editor must know the anonymous source’s identity and verify details of their story.
When authors or sources are granted anonymity, NPQ will make every effort to ensure any identifying information is sufficiently obscured or diluted. This may include language related to a person’s gender, race or ethnicity, workplace, specific actions, and so on. Editors should read with an eye toward ensuring this information is as specific as it can be without compromising anonymity.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI)
OVERVIEW
Generative artificial intelligence is the use of large language models to create something new, such as text, images, graphics, and interactive media. Although generative AI has the potential to improve newsgathering, it also has the potential to harm journalists’ credibility and our unique relationship with our audience.
As such, NPQ uses generative AI and AI-related tools only in ways that respect the content’s human creator and where they contribute to the creation and distribution of original journalism. We do not publish journalism without human intervention. We do not publish stories entirely generated by AI.
Writers are responsible for ensuring their writing is primarily their own, and that any use of AI has not introduced errors, bias, or plagiarism into their work. As an organization focusing on leaders, nonprofit workers, and movement advocates, we want genuine voices speaking from experience, expressing complex ideas in engaging ways. We want the human element in our publications.
We also recognize that AI is rapidly evolving and our perspectives and policies may change as a result.
POLICY
The following core values will guide our work. These principles apply explicitly to the newsroom and throughout other non-news departments including advertising, events, marketing and development.
A. Transparency
As we use AI in our journalism, we will document and describe the tools we use with specificity. When AI tools influence audience-facing content, we will tell the audience in ways that both disclose and educate news consumers. We will work with editors and designers to create disclosures that are precise in language without being onerous to our audience. This may be a short tagline, a caption or credit, or for something more substantial, an editor’s note. When appropriate, we will include the prompts that are fed into the model to generate the material.
Any external writers are held to the same standards of transparency. We ask that all writers disclose upfront whether and how they used AI in their work.
Internally, our transparency facilitates conversation and creativity. It will be clear to our peers and our bosses whenever we are using generative AI. This will facilitate collective learning and help us create applicable, transitory policies as the technologies evolve.
Externally, communication and disclosure ideally create opportunities to get feedback from the audience, as well as educate consumers. As journalists, part of our job is to empower the audience with news literacy skills. AI literacy—understanding how generative AI works, what benefits it brings to the information ecosystem and how to avoid AI-generated misinformation—is a subset of news literacy.
B. Accuracy and human verification
All information generated by AI requires human verification. It is important to be explicit about how we know facts are facts. For example, an editor should review prompts, and any other inputs used to generate a story or other material. And all results should be replicable.
C. Audience service
Our work in AI should be guided by what will be useful to our audience as we serve them.
D. Privacy and security
Our relationship with our audience is rooted in trust and respect. To that end, as we use AI, we will protect our audience’s data in accordance with our privacy policies and we will disclose any editorial content that has been created and distributed based on personalization created by AI.
E. Exploration
With the above principles as our foundation, we will embrace responsible exploration and experimentation. We will strive to invest in newsroom training—internal or external—so every staff member is knowledgeable in generative AI tools.
Regular training on AI tools and experiments will be available and at times even mandatory. This training will be delivered by a combination of internal staff members and outside experts.
F. Editorial use
1. Generative AI is permitted for the following purposes:
- Research
It’s acceptable to ask a publicly available large language model to research a topic. However, you must independently verify every fact. It is fairly common for AI to “hallucinate” information, including facts, biographical information, and even newspaper citations.
- Headline experimentation
Asking AI to generate headlines is a form of research. The same caveats apply. Also, be sure to put enough facts into the prompt that the headline is based on our journalism and not other reporting.
- Searching and assembling data
It is permissible to use AI to search for information, mine public databases or assemble and calculate statistics that would be useful to our audience. Any data analysis should be checked by an editor.
- Visuals
It is permissible to use AI occasionally to create illustrations for publication, according to the principles and limitations outlined here.
We may use AI-generated images in our creative work, especially when we need to illustrate complex or abstract concepts that can’t be adequately captured through traditional photography or existing royalty-free imagery. These instances are the exception, not the rule, and are always handled with intention and care.
AI is not a shortcut or a cost-saving replacement for paying artists. Our use of AI tools for visuals is not about convenience but about precision, clarity, and carefully visualizing the unseen.
Every AI-generated image we publish involves deep human collaboration and are not made in a vacuum; they are shaped by human creativity, context, and editorial judgment.
All illustrations must credit the AI service used.
2. Generative AI is NOT permitted for the following purposes:
- Summary paragraphs
Do not use AI to generate article summaries that appear at the top of our work. This requires feeding entire articles into the tool, which violates our privacy and security policy listed above.
- Fact-checking
Use of AI alone is not sufficient for independent fact-checking. Facts should be checked against multiple authoritative sources that have been created, edited or curated by human beings. A single source is generally not sufficient; information should be checked against multiple sources.
- Manipulating photos or other media created by a human.
Visual journalists need to be aware of software updates to photo processing tools to ensure AI-enhancement is being used according to our policies.
Sources:
