Editorial Standards
Editorial independence
Editorial decisions at The GRC Journal are made on argument and evidence, not on commercial relationships. Any commercial affiliation relevant to a piece is disclosed to readers.
Evidence and sourcing
We prefer original sources and primary data. Claims are proportionate to the evidence behind them, and limitations are stated plainly rather than smoothed over.
Contributor affiliations
Contributors disclose relevant affiliations and conflicts of interest alongside their byline, so readers can weigh the work with full context.
Vendor contributions
A commercial affiliation does not disqualify someone's expertise, but product promotion is not accepted as editorial analysis.
Editing
The Journal may restructure, shorten, clarify, and fact-check contributed work while preserving the author's meaning and intent.
Review
Where appropriate, contributors may review edited work before publication to confirm factual accuracy and that it still represents their intent faithfully. Review is for accuracy, not for softening conclusions the evidence supports.
AI use
AI tools may assist with editorial production, such as drafting support, copyediting, and research organization. AI is never used to fabricate sources, quotations, or evidence, and any substantive AI involvement in a piece's underlying research is disclosed.
Corrections
Material errors are corrected transparently and logged on the Corrections page. Minor typography fixes are not logged.
Research integrity
Where the Journal publishes its own research or analysis, the methodology, its limitations, and any conflicts of interest are disclosed alongside the findings. Uncertainty is stated rather than smoothed over for a cleaner narrative.
Privacy and vulnerable sources
A fuller policy for confidential or sensitive interviews will be developed as the Journal begins that kind of reporting.