Below is a summary of where we stand ethically with regards to coverage of …Well, anything we cover on this site (or on social media).
We have not (and will not) accept payment (in any form, from physical goods to money or favours) in return for posting an article or a link on our website.
It’s not cool.
We do not accept sponsored or paid-for spots on social media, be that @mentions, likes or shares.
Also not cool.
We have not (and will not) accept anything from a company we write about if access is contingent on them being able to preview what we write. That would compromise integrity which (you guessed it) is simply not cool.
If access to news, especially on an ongoing basis, hinges on affording a company or project preferential editorial treatment, we nope the situation and move on.
We have not (and will not) publish press releases in whole as a ‘news article’. Press releases are a common way for companies to share news, but we always use as a base. We will quote and editorialise based on a press release, but not take it verbatim: this is a blog, not a billboard!
We do not agree to cover news if it is conditional on “guidelines” or caveats or editorial interference in how we can present things to do. It’s our site, so it’s our thoughts.
Some news content published on this site is often written in advance, subject to a timed embargo that we (and other publishers) agree to abide by. This is standard industry practice and means you get timely, accurate news and we get time to prepare it, ask questions, etc.
Some news content published on this site may also be subject to a non-disclosure agreement(s). This is rare and typically concerns commercially sensitive commercial news, like takeovers, IPOs, CEO changes. We do not disclose where an NDA is in effect since… We can’t, but it’s only happened twice in 16 years.
If we receive review samples (e.g, hardware, usually) it is disclosed in the news item or review pertaining. We never accept a review sample on condition of writing a “good review”, not mentioning flaws, or anything else. Most review units are returned (as is industry practice).
If there is a conflict of interest, be it professional or personal, between article topic and author it will be disclosed in the article itself.
We do not personally back crowdfunding projects we write about. This is an extreme position but we feel it helps to keep boundaries distinct and avoid bias in any followup coverage.
If there’s anything you want to know or would like us to clarify, give us a poke @omgubuntu or get in touch using the contact form, which comes straight to our e-mail.