It's been a while since I've mentioned Skype Journal's editorial policies. They've been in effect since we started and all contributions to Skype Journal are subject to them.

1. Accuracy. Anything that purports to be non-fiction should be true. Which means it should be accurate in fact and in context.

2. Labeling and Sourcing. If we are not certain that something is accurate, we should either not publish it, or should make that uncertainty plain by clearly stating the source of this information and its possible limits and pitfalls. To take another example of making the quality of information clear, we believe that that if unnamed sources must be used, they would be labeled in a way that sheds light on the limits and biases of the information they offer.

3. Explicit Conflicts of Interest. The content of anything that sells itself as journalism should be free of any motive other than informing its consumers. In other words, it should not be motivated, for example, by the desire to curry favor with an advertiser or to advance particular political interest. On the other hand, much of the content of this site has at least one point of view. We reserve the right to let our contributors opine, so long as author biases or conflicts are explicit and on record.

4. Accountability. The contributors to this site hold ourselves as accountable as any of the subjects we write about. We are eager to receive complaints about our work, will investigate complaints diligently, and correct mistakes of fact, context, and fairness prominently and clearly.

5. Caveat Lector. Information contained here is from sources believed to be reliable. This information is not necessarily complete.

A note from Jim Courtney about our editorial independence from Skype:

While Skype serves as a primary focus of our coverage, at no time has Skype treated us with any favours or treatment beyond normal courtesies to the press.  Some third party Skype affiliates have done advertising with us but that, in no way, affects our editorial coverage. It is a matter of policy that anything that may be interpreted as a conflict of interest become transparent in a post.

What do you think?

Please let us know when we stray. We read everything sent to editor @ skypejournal.com.

Thanks.

Phil Wolff