PUBLICATION RECORD · REV. 01
EDITORIAL STANDARDS
RMJ Insight is a source-linked field journal for people trying to understand technology and its consequences without mistaking speed for certainty. This record explains what readers can expect from the work and how we correct it when it falls short.
FILE 01 · EVIDENCE
Sources are part of the record
Each reported dispatch is expected to carry a sourceLinks record with direct, verifiable links. We prefer primary material: original research, filings, official announcements, technical documentation, or the originating organization’s statement. A secondary source may be used when it adds necessary reporting or context, and should be named as such.
A link supports a specific claim; it is not a blanket endorsement of every conclusion in the dispatch. Readers should follow the source where the distinction matters.
FILE 02 · LANGUAGE
Reporting, analysis, and uncertainty
We separate what a source says from what the editorial desk infers. Words such as “announced,” “reported,” and “found” identify attributable facts. Phrases such as “may,” “suggests,” “risk,” and “watch” mark analysis, uncertainty, or a claim that needs more evidence.
Especially for health, markets, policy, and early research, a concise dispatch is orientation—not medical, legal, financial, or professional advice. A small number of sources or a striking result is never treated as settled evidence.
FILE 03 · CORRECTIONS
Corrections remain visible
When a material factual error is confirmed, the affected dispatch will be corrected and given a dated editor’s note describing the substance of the change. Clarifications that substantially alter meaning receive the same treatment. We do not silently rewrite a material claim.
To flag a possible error or a broken citation, open an issue in the public publication registry. Include the dispatch URL, the specific passage, and a reliable supporting source where possible.
FILE 04 · SCOPE
A useful map, not the territory
The publication covers AI, technology, company building, practical tools, human performance, and culture through recurring desks. Selection reflects usefulness, evidence quality, and the chance that a development will matter after the news cycle—not an attempt to be comprehensive.
The site is static and does not use reader accounts or behavioral analytics. That protects reader privacy, but it also means improvement hypotheses are tested through editorial review, technical checks, and reader reports rather than private surveillance.