These standards describe how The Defense Brief reports, analyses and corrects, and how we handle personal information in that work. They apply to our editorial analysis, intelligence cases, briefs, contributor stories licensed through DB Wire, and the automated summaries we publish. They are a statement of practice. Publishing them does not by itself make any activity “journalism” for the purposes of any law, and it does not create rights for or against anyone.
1. Accuracy and Verification
- We try to get things right before we publish, and we say how sure we are. Claims are checked against the best available source, preferably a primary one — the official document, the dataset, the court record, the contract notice.
- A claim that rests on a single source is labelled as such or held until it is corroborated. Intelligence cases carry a confidence level, and every extracted actor, event and claim must be traceable to a passage in the source report.
- We distinguish what is confirmed, what is reported by others, what is alleged, and what is our own inference. Intelligence cases record this for every claim (“verified fact”, “allegation”, “inference”, “disputed”, “false claim”).
- Dates matter in fast-moving conflicts. Each tool shows when its data was collected, and we say when something may be out of date.
2. Reporting, Analysis and Opinion
Reporting tells you what happened and who says so. Analysis explains what it may mean, and is labelled as analysis. We do not publish opinion as fact. Scenario outputs describe hypothetical developments and are labelled as scenarios, not forecasts. Market-related content describes exposure to events; it is not investment advice (see our Disclaimer).
3. Attribution and Source Provenance
- We name our sources wherever we can, and link to them where they are public. Summaries show the publisher, the link and the date we saw an item.
- We keep a record of where information came from — the source, publisher, address, publication date and the date we retrieved it — so a claim can be traced after publication.
- Quotations are exact and short. We summarise other publishers’ work in our own words and link to the original rather than reproducing it.
- Data from open datasets (for example the GDELT Project, government procurement feeds and official sanctions lists) is credited to its publisher, and its limits are explained on the tool that uses it.
4. Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT)
Much of our work draws on publicly available information: official publications, procurement and contract notices, corporate filings, satellite and mapping services, media reporting and social media. Being public does not make information accurate or fair to use. We verify open-source material before relying on it, record how we found it, avoid amplifying manipulated media, and do not use open-source techniques to locate, profile or expose private individuals who are not the legitimate subject of a story.
5. AI-Assisted Research
- Some of our summaries, signals and briefings are produced with AI models. These are labelled as AI-generated wherever they appear, and they are not reviewed by an editor before they are shown unless we say otherwise.
- AI tools are instructed to attribute claims to their sources, to present allegations as allegations, and not to give investment recommendations. They can still be wrong. Treat them as a starting point, and tell us when they are.
- Editorial analysis and intelligence cases that use AI for extraction are reviewed by people before publication, against the source text.
- We do not use your personal information to train AI models.
6. Allegations and Right of Reply
Before we publish a serious allegation about an identifiable person or organization — for example of crime, corruption, fraud, sanctions evasion, terrorism, espionage or abuse — we:
- require a credible, identified source and supporting evidence, and record them;
- attribute the allegation, and say whether it has been proven, charged, denied or is under investigation;
- record our confidence and the review decision;
- seek a response from the person or organization where it is practical and fair to do so, and report it; and
- have an editor review it. Our submission and publication systems screen for unattributed allegations and hold them until an editor clears them with a written note.
7. Privacy and the Public Interest
- We report on public officials, military commanders, executives and organizations in connection with their public roles. We are careful with information about private individuals, and with anyone’s private life.
- We do not publish home addresses, personal phone numbers, personal email addresses, identity-document numbers, health information, or details of family members, unless there is a clear public interest that cannot be served another way, and an editor has agreed. Our systems screen submissions for this kind of information and hold them for review.
- We take particular care with victims of conflict, children, and people at risk of reprisal. We do not identify them without a compelling reason.
- We avoid graphic images of violence, and we do not republish terrorist or violent extremist propaganda. We quote extremist material only where necessary to report on it, with context.
- How we handle the personal information of our readers and members is covered by our Privacy Policy, not these standards.
8. Confidential Sources
We use confidential sources only when the information is important, cannot reasonably be obtained on the record, and we have good reason to believe the source is in a position to know. We tell readers why a source is not named. We protect the identity of sources we have agreed to keep confidential, and we do not make that promise lightly. Contributors must tell an editor who their confidential sources are.
9. Classified and Controlled Information
We do not solicit, publish or license classified information, export-controlled technical data or technology, or material disclosed in breach of a legal duty of confidence. Material that carries classification or export-control markings is flagged automatically and escalated rather than published. Reporting that such information exists, or on public policy about it, is different from republishing it, and we keep that distinction. If you believe we hold or have published controlled information, please use our report form.
10. Conflicts of Interest
Contributors and staff must tell an editor about any financial or personal interest in a subject they cover, including holdings in companies they write about and paid work for organizations they cover. Where a conflict cannot be managed, the person does not cover the subject. People associated with The Defense Brief may hold investments in companies we mention; we do not change our coverage for commercial reasons. If we publish sponsored or commissioned work, it will be labelled as such.
11. Corrections
- We correct material errors promptly and say what was changed and when. Intelligence cases show a correction note and version history.
- Anyone can report an error using our report form or by writing to info@defensebrief.ca with the subject line “Correction”. We acknowledge reports within two business days.
- We do not remove accurate reporting because it is unwelcome, but we will review a request to update or remove an item where it is inaccurate, unfair, or intrudes on privacy without a continuing public interest.
12. Complaints
If you are unhappy with something we published, use the report form. An editor reviews every complaint, and serious complaints — about unlawful content, privacy, defamation or safety — are handled as a priority. We will tell you what we decided and why.