This document defines who we are, what we stand for, and the lines we will not cross — regardless of pressure, consequence, or cost. It is the moral foundation beneath our editorial standards.
NonProfit Media exists because investigative journalism — the kind that holds governments, corporations, and institutions accountable — is expensive, slow, legally risky, and commercially unattractive. The market does not produce enough of it. We do it anyway, funded by people who believe the public has a right to know what power is doing in its name.
That mission creates obligations. We cannot demand accountability from others while exempting ourselves. We cannot ask sources to trust us with their safety if we do not protect them absolutely. We cannot ask readers to trust our findings if we do not earn that trust through rigorous, transparent, and honest journalism.
This ethics policy is not a compliance document. It is a statement of who we are. These standards apply to every member of our staff, every contributor, every freelancer, and every partner. They are enforced — not aspirational.
These eight values are not a mission statement written for a brochure. They are the principles that guide difficult decisions — when the evidence is incomplete, when the subject is powerful, when publication carries risk.
We publish what is true, not what is convenient. We do not soften findings to protect relationships, avoid controversy, or spare powerful institutions from scrutiny. The truth is our obligation — not a preference.
We hold power accountable regardless of political affiliation, institutional prestige, or donor relationships. Corporations, governments, nonprofits, and individuals in positions of trust are all subject to the same scrutiny. No one is off-limits.
We exist to serve the public — particularly those who lack the resources, access, or platform to hold power accountable themselves. Our journalism is not a product. It is a public service, funded by people who believe in it.
We disclose our funding, our methodology, our mistakes, and our reasoning. We do not hide behind institutional opacity. If we expect transparency from those we cover, we must model it ourselves — completely and without exception.
Our editorial independence is not a policy — it is a structural commitment. No donor, funder, board member, or advertiser has editorial authority. We have turned down funding that came with strings. We will do so again.
The people most harmed by the systems we investigate are not background characters in our stories — they are the reason we do this work. We center their voices, their expertise, and their experiences. We do not treat powerful institutions as the default authoritative source.
We pursue stories that matter over time, not just stories that trend today. We follow up. We track outcomes. We measure whether our journalism produced accountability. Impact is not a byproduct of our work — it is the point.
We hold ourselves to the same standard we apply to those we cover. We correct errors promptly and transparently. We acknowledge when our reporting was incomplete or wrong. We do not protect our reputation at the expense of the truth.
The following are not policy violations subject to case-by-case review — they are bright lines. Crossing them ends employment at NonProfit Media. Some are grounds for public disclosure of the violation. There are no exceptions and no appeals based on intent.
Fabricating quotes, sources, events, or data is an absolute prohibition. Plagiarism — presenting another journalist's work as our own without attribution — is equally prohibited. Both are grounds for immediate termination and public disclosure.
Covering organizations, individuals, or issues in which a journalist has an undisclosed financial, personal, or political interest is prohibited. Conflicts must be disclosed to editors before assignment — not after publication.
Revealing the identity of a confidential source without their explicit consent is an absolute prohibition — regardless of legal pressure, institutional pressure, or personal circumstance. We have never done this. We will not.
Shaping, softening, spiking, or directing coverage based on donor interests or funding relationships is prohibited. Any journalist or editor who receives such a request must report it to the Editor-in-Chief immediately.
Misrepresenting one's identity or affiliation to obtain information is prohibited except in extraordinary circumstances where the public interest is compelling, deception is the only viable method, and the Editor-in-Chief has approved it in advance.
Deliberately omitting material facts that would change the meaning or impact of a story — particularly facts that favor the subject of critical coverage — is a form of inaccuracy and is prohibited.
Publishing serious allegations before completing verification, legal review, and subject notification is prohibited. Speed does not justify publishing what we cannot stand behind. We would rather be second and right than first and wrong.
Individual ethics depend on institutional structures that support them. These are the organizational commitments NonProfit Media has made — and maintains — to ensure our ethics policy is more than words.
NonProfit Media is organized as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit specifically to insulate our journalism from commercial pressures. We have no shareholders. We carry no advertising. Our revenue comes from readers, foundations, and individual donors who support our mission — not our conclusions. Our bylaws prohibit donors from serving on the editorial team or exercising editorial authority in any form.
Every year, we publish a full transparency report disclosing: all donors above $5,000, our total revenue and expenses, the number of investigations published, corrections issued, and FOIA requests filed. We believe accountability journalism requires accountable institutions. Our transparency report is available on our website and archived permanently.
Our fundraising and editorial operations are structurally separated. Development staff do not attend editorial meetings. Editors do not attend donor meetings. No story is shared with donors before publication. No coverage area is promised to funders. When donors have asked for influence over coverage — it has happened — we have declined and, in some cases, returned the funding.
We maintain an internal Ethics Committee composed of senior editorial staff and an independent external member with no financial relationship to the organization. The committee reviews ethics complaints, advises on difficult editorial decisions, and conducts an annual review of our ethics policy. Its findings are shared with the full newsroom.
We maintain a legal defense fund specifically to fight subpoenas seeking to identify confidential sources, defend against SLAPP suits filed by subjects of our investigations, and support journalists who face legal retaliation for their reporting. We will not be silenced by litigation.
We track the real-world outcomes of our investigations: policy changes, legislative action, corporate accountability, criminal referrals, and public awareness shifts. We publish an annual impact report. We believe journalism that produces no accountability has failed its purpose — and we hold ourselves to that standard.
An ethics policy is only as strong as its enforcement. When concerns are raised — about our journalism, our conduct, or our standards — this is how we respond.
Complaints may be submitted by anyone — readers, sources, subjects of coverage, or staff — via email to [email protected] or through our secure tip system. All complaints are logged and acknowledged within 24 hours.
The Standards Editor reviews the complaint within 48 hours to determine whether it raises a genuine ethics concern, a factual dispute, or a disagreement with editorial judgment. Each category is handled differently.
Substantive ethics complaints are investigated by the Ethics Committee. The journalist involved is notified and given an opportunity to respond. Relevant editors and records are reviewed. The investigation is completed within 10 business days for most complaints.
The Ethics Committee issues a written finding. If a violation is confirmed, appropriate action is taken — ranging from a correction or clarification to reassignment, suspension, or termination depending on severity. The finding is shared with the complainant.
Confirmed ethics violations that affected published content are disclosed publicly — in the affected article and in our corrections archive. We do not quietly fix errors. We acknowledge them.
This Ethics Policy defines our values and institutional commitments — the why and the who we are. Our Editorial Standards & Fact-Checking document defines the operational procedures — the how: our investigation process, source verification protocols, fact-checking steps, corrections policy, and whistleblower protections.
Both documents are binding. Both are enforced. Neither supersedes the other — they work together. When a specific situation is not addressed by either document, the guiding question is always: what would a journalist of integrity, serving the public interest, do?
If you believe we have violated our ethics policy, published inaccurate information, or acted in a way inconsistent with our stated values, we want to know. All complaints are reviewed. All substantive concerns receive a written response.
We will make mistakes. When we do, we will correct them publicly and without minimizing what went wrong. We will be pressured to soften stories, protect sources of funding, or avoid powerful subjects. We will refuse. Our credibility is not a marketing asset — it is the only thing that makes our journalism worth reading.
NonProfit Media Ethics Policy — Last Updated May 2, 2026