OZJF is an advocacy group. We have a point of view and we say so. That does not lower the bar for accuracy. It raises the need to label what a page is, what claim it is making, and what evidence carries that claim.
What readers should see at a glance
A reader should know on sight whether a page is background record, reported summary, analysis, commentary, campaign copy, or policy. The labeling, the tone, and the evidence should match.
Core editorial rules
- Factual claims must be sourced and dated.
- Interpretive claims are shown as interpretation, not raw fact.
- Numbers name their source and their timing.
- Quotes stay faithful to the original wording and context.
- Corrections are visible when a change shifts meaning.
What we will not publish
We will not publish pages that sound certain while leaning on vague sources or rhetorical shortcuts. We will not let advocacy wording crowd out the record. The argument can be strong. The sourcing still has to hold.
Outside standards we draw on
Two public reference points guide this page. The Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics is a durable guide to accuracy, accountability, and correction practice. The AAPOR Transparency Initiative is a reminder that survey and polling claims should be open enough for readers to inspect. We do not copy every newsroom norm. We do learn from groups that take disclosure seriously.