Editorial Policy

This policy governs editorial journalism and professional content published by EGIL. Its purpose is to protect accuracy, editorial independence, freedom of expression and the rights of people covered by our reporting. It also sets the boundary between independent editorial work and paid client content. It applies across websites, newsletters, podcasts, video, social channels, reports and events where EGIL exercises editorial control.

It should be read with EGIL’s Website Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, AI Acceptable Use and Governance Policy, Advertising Terms, complaints process and relevant staff procedures. It does not convert advertising or client-controlled material into independent journalism.

1. Editorial responsibility and independence

The Managing Editor has day-to-day authority over independent editorial content. Commercial teams, clients, sponsors, advertisers and personal relationships must not determine whether independent editorial coverage is commissioned, the conclusion it reaches, or how prominently it is presented.

The Chief Executive or Founders may intervene for legal, ethical, safety, resource or serious reputational reasons, but not to provide an undisclosed commercial advantage. A material intervention that changes or stops independent coverage should be recorded with the reason. Final legal responsibility remains with EGIL as publisher.

Journalists and editors must disclose financial, personal or professional interests that could reasonably call their independence into question. The Managing Editor will decide whether disclosure, reassignment or another safeguard is appropriate.

2. Accuracy fairness and context

EGIL takes reasonable care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or materially distorted information, images, headlines, captions or statistics. Accuracy does not require every article to give equal space to every viewpoint. It requires claims to be supported, important context not to be omitted in a misleading way, and comment, allegation, conjecture and established fact to be distinguished clearly.

Use primary sources where reasonably available and identify the date, scope and limitations of data.
Verify names, roles, quotations, figures, legal outcomes and material allegations before publication.
Do not present a press release, social post, AI output or single anonymous claim as independently verified evidence.
Headlines and promotional copy must be supported by the article and must not exaggerate findings merely to drive engagement.
Where facts are disputed, state the nature of the dispute fairly and avoid implying that an allegation has been proved.

3. Sources quotations and attribution

Writers must keep sufficient notes or source records to show how material factual claims were checked. Quotations must preserve the speaker’s meaning. Minor edits for length, grammar or clarity must not materially change that meaning. Material supplied under embargo, off the record or on an agreed background basis must be handled according to the terms agreed before disclosure.

Anonymous sources may be used where they have credible knowledge and there is a proper reason to protect identity. The responsible editor must know, or be satisfied that an authorised senior journalist knows, the source’s identity and basis of knowledge. Corroboration should be sought for serious allegations. EGIL does not promise absolute source protection where disclosure is required by law, but will not identify a confidential source casually.

Third-party words, data, graphics and ideas must be attributed when a reasonable reader would expect it. Links are helpful but do not replace attribution, permission or verification.

4. Right of reply and serious allegations

A person or organisation facing a significant criticism or allegation should normally be given a fair opportunity to respond before publication. The request must explain the substance of the allegation, provide a reasonable deadline in the circumstances and identify EGIL. Urgency does not justify an artificial deadline where a fair response could reasonably be obtained.

The response should be reflected accurately and with proportionate prominence. EGIL is not required to publish it in full, accept conditions that compromise editorial control, or delay indefinitely. If there is a strong public-interest reason to publish before receiving a response, the editor must record the reason and update the article where appropriate when a material response arrives.

5. Privacy personal data and vulnerable people

Editorial freedom must be balanced against privacy, data protection, dignity and potential harm. Before publishing private or sensitive information, editors should consider the subject’s reasonable expectation of privacy, consent, the information already made public by that person, relevance to the story, the seriousness of intrusion, the position and vulnerability of the person and the public interest.

Particular care is required with children, health information, bereavement, suicide, sexual offences, victims of crime, home addresses, private correspondence and images taken where privacy is reasonably expected. Legal reporting restrictions and statutory anonymity must always be checked. Special category data must not be included merely because it is available.

Journalistic processing of personal data must be documented and handled under EGIL’s Privacy Policy and applicable data-protection law. The journalism exemption is not automatic. Its use must be considered and recorded where material, including whether publication is in the public interest and compliance with the relevant provision would be incompatible with journalism.

6. Public interest

Public interest may include detecting or exposing crime, serious misconduct, dishonesty, risks to public health or safety, misleading the public, significant failures in workplace governance, or matters contributing to an informed debate. It is not the same as what interests the public.

The editor must assess whether the expected public interest is proportionate to any intrusion or harm and whether the same purpose can reasonably be achieved by less intrusive means. Where public interest is relied on to justify a significant departure from this policy, the decision and reasoning must be recorded before publication unless urgent circumstances make that impossible.

7. Legal and high risk review

The following must be escalated to the Managing Editor before publication and, where appropriate, to the Chief Executive or external legal adviser:

serious allegations of illegality, dishonesty, discrimination, harassment, professional misconduct or regulatory breach;
material obtained through leaks, covert methods, confidential documents or disputed recordings;
active legal proceedings, court reporting, reporting restrictions, injunction threats or contempt risks;
significant privacy, data-protection, defamation, copyright or source-protection concerns;
identification of children, vulnerable adults, victims or people connected to highly sensitive events; and
content likely to create a credible risk of physical, psychological or employment harm.

The review and decision should be recorded. Legal review manages risk; it does not transfer editorial responsibility to the lawyer.

8. Editorial sign off and publication controls

Every item must have a named author or responsible producer and an appropriate editor. Routine content may follow delegated desk procedures. High-risk content requires recorded senior approval. Publishing permissions must be limited by role, and substantive post-publication changes must be traceable through the content-management system where practicable.

Editors must check the headline, standfirst, images, captions, links, metadata, social copy and newsletter treatment as well as the main text. Time pressure, automated publication and client deadlines do not remove these duties.

9. Commercial sponsored and partner content

Independent editorial content, EGIL-created sponsored content and client-controlled advertising must be distinguishable. Payment, sponsorship, free products, affiliate arrangements or another material commercial relationship must be disclosed clearly where it could affect how a reasonable reader understands the content.

Content controlled by, approved by or created principally for a client must carry a prominent label such as Advertisement, Advertorial, Sponsored content or Paid partnership, chosen to describe the arrangement accurately. Vague labels such as Partner, Promoted or In association with must not be relied on where they could leave commercial intent unclear.

A sponsor may agree the commissioned topic, factual product information and contractual deliverables, but may not require EGIL to present unsubstantiated claims as fact or disguise advertising as independent journalism. Client-supplied claims remain subject to legal, advertising and rights checks. Editorial-style paid content must comply with the CAP Code where it is a marketing communication.

10. Copyright licences and commissioned work

Copyright created by an employee in the course of employment will normally belong to EGIL, subject to any agreement to the contrary. Employment contracts should confirm ownership, permitted uses and moral-rights arrangements where appropriate.

Freelancers and contractors normally own commissioned work unless rights are assigned in writing. EGIL must therefore obtain, before use, either a written assignment or a licence broad enough for the intended publication, archive, editing, promotion, syndication and reuse. A full assignment is not mandatory for every commission. The rights obtained should be proportionate to the commercial need and the fee.

Contributors must identify third-party material and confirm that they have authority to supply it. Moral rights, credits and integrity rights must be respected unless validly waived or otherwise addressed in writing. EGIL must retain the relevant contract, licence or permission record.

11. Third party text images audio and data

Material may be used only where EGIL owns the rights, has an adequate licence or permission, or has documented a reasonable legal basis such as an applicable fair-dealing exception. Being publicly accessible, found through a search engine, embedded on social media or credited to the creator does not by itself permit reuse.

Stock, Creative Commons, open-government and editorial-use licences must be checked for scope, territory, duration, attribution, modification, commercial-use and platform restrictions. Fair dealing is fact-specific and must not be treated as a general quota. Screenshots, thumbnails, photographs, charts, logos, music and video clips all require a rights decision.

Images must not be materially misleading. Captions should distinguish a file photograph, illustration, reconstruction or AI-generated image from a photograph of the reported event where that distinction matters.

12. Originality plagiarism and fabrication

Plagiarism, fabrication and material unattributed copying are prohibited. Similarity-checking tools may support review but cannot decide whether use is lawful or original. Editors must investigate meaningful matches in context rather than relying on a software score.

Writers must not invent quotations, interviews, people, companies, cases, survey findings, sources or first-hand observation. Composite examples must be clearly identified and must not misleadingly imply a real individual or event.

13. Use of artificial intelligence

AI may assist research planning, transcription, summarisation, drafting, image creation and production only in accordance with EGIL’s AI Acceptable Use and Governance Policy. AI output is not a source. Material factual claims, quotations and citations must be checked against reliable underlying evidence.

A responsible editor must review public editorial output at a level proportionate to risk. AI involvement must be disclosed where an audience would otherwise be materially misled, where synthetic media appears authentic, or where law or contract requires it. Routine spelling, formatting or brainstorming assistance does not normally need a public label.

Unpublished source material, confidential information, personal data or client content must not be entered into an unapproved AI tool. Editorial staff must not use AI to impersonate a source, generate a false quotation or create a realistic depiction of a real person or event without authority and appropriate disclosure.

14. Corrections clarifications and updates

EGIL will correct significant inaccuracies promptly and with appropriate prominence. The correction should state what was wrong and provide the corrected position. It must not silently replace a material error in a way that conceals what changed. Minor spelling, formatting, link or style changes may be made without a correction note where they do not alter meaning.

A clarification may be used where the original wording was accurate but materially unclear. An update may record later events without implying that the earlier report was wrong. An apology should be considered where EGIL caused significant avoidable harm or published a serious inaccuracy. Corrections must be carried through to material headlines, social posts, newsletters and syndicated versions where reasonably possible.

15. Archives removal anonymisation and search visibility

EGIL maintains an editorial archive as part of the historical record. Age alone does not make an accurate article unlawful or require removal. A request to delete, anonymise, correct or de-index archived content must be assessed individually rather than rejected automatically.

The review should consider continuing accuracy, legal status, public interest at publication and now, the person’s role, sensitivity, harm, passage of time, current accessibility and prominence, search-engine effects, journalistic purpose, data-protection rights and less intrusive alternatives. Possible outcomes include no change, correction, update, contextual note, reduced prominence, search de-indexing, anonymisation or removal.

The Managing Editor and Data Protection Lead must review material archive requests together, with legal input where necessary. Any change should preserve the integrity of the record as far as reasonably possible and the decision and reasons should be documented.

16. Editorial complaints

Complaints should be sent to [email protected] and should identify the content, the disputed words or material, the reason for concern and the remedy requested. EGIL will acknowledge a substantive complaint promptly, investigate it fairly and respond within a reasonable period depending on complexity and urgency.

The Managing Editor handles the first review. A complainant who remains dissatisfied may request escalation to the Chief Executive, who should not simply repeat the original review and may obtain independent or legal input. EGIL will preserve relevant versions, source records and correspondence while a complaint is active. Abusive or repetitive contact may be managed proportionately without preventing a genuine complaint from being considered.

17. Protection and enforcement of EGIL content

EGIL may monitor unauthorised reuse of its content and preserve evidence including URLs, dates, screenshots and copies. Before making a demand, EGIL must confirm ownership or licensing authority, identify the material and use complained of, and consider whether permission, quotation, fair dealing or another exception may apply.

The response should be proportionate and may include a correction or credit request, licensing proposal, platform complaint, UK or overseas takedown process, cease-and-desist letter or legal advice. A US DMCA notice should be used only where the relevant service and statutory process apply. Automated monitoring matches must be reviewed by a person before enforcement action.

18. Responsibilities training and review

The Managing Editor maintains editorial procedures, delegations, corrections and complaints records. Editors train and supervise contributors. Commercial teams must respect the editorial boundary and ensure paid content is identified before commissioning and publication. All staff must report suspected inaccuracies, rights problems, conflicts or policy breaches promptly.

Breaches may result in correction, content removal, access restriction, training, investigation, disciplinary action or contractual remedies, applied fairly under the relevant procedure. This policy will be reviewed at least annually and after a material complaint, legal change or failure of editorial controls.

19. Contact

Editorial questions and complaints [email protected]
Privacy and archived-content requests [email protected]
Legal and licensing enquiries [email protected]

Executive Grapevine International Ltd

Registered in England & Wales: 2789779 | VAT: 6259453 20

Gate House, Fretherne Road, Welwyn Garden City, AL8 6NS, United Kingdom | +44 (0)1707 351451

Last reviewed by: Helen Fish, Director, 11 September 2026