Our editorial standards
What we publish, what we refuse to publish, and how to hold us to it.
Updated
Two kinds of content, kept separate
Everything on this site falls into one of two categories, and we try never to let them blur. The first is third-party material: headlines from public feeds and market data from API providers, always attributed, always linking out. The second is our own writing: the Insights library, plus pages like this one.
The separation is deliberate and visible. Third-party headlines appear as attributed cards with a publisher name and a timestamp. Our own writing carries a byline, a published date, and an updated date. If you cannot tell which you are reading, that is a defect and we would like to hear about it.
How headlines are selected
Category boards are populated from public headline feeds and market news APIs. Each item is normalized into a consistent card — title, source, timestamp, and where available an image and the publisher's own short teaser. Duplicates are collapsed so a single URL does not flood a category, and local boards are scoped by city where the feed supports it.
Selection is by category and recency rather than by editorial judgment about individual stories. We are not making a claim that a story is important by surfacing it; we are reporting that it is circulating in that category. That is a weaker claim than a newsroom's front page makes, and we would rather state it plainly than imply otherwise.
What a story brief contains
Opening a headline takes you to a brief: the headline, the publisher, a timestamp, the publisher's teaser if the feed supplied one, and a prominent link to the full report. Market stories may also carry ticker context — quotes and charts drawn from market data providers.
What a brief does not contain is the publisher's article body. We do not scrape, rewrite, or host that reporting. An earlier version of this site did extract full article text into a reader view; we removed that capability, because reproducing a publisher's article on our domain captures value from work we did not do. If a story is worth your time, the right place to read it is where the journalists published it.
How Insights are written and corrected
Insights are original explainers written by our desk on news literacy, market language, and how to read data releases. They are drafted, reviewed for accuracy and clarity, and published with a byline and dates. They are not summaries of other publications' articles, and they are not unlabelled machine output presented as reporting.
Errors of fact get corrected with an updated date rather than quietly rewritten. If you find one, editorial@huzzflow.com reaches a person. We would rather carry a visible correction than a clean record we did not earn — a point argued at more length in our piece on what corrections reveal about a publication.
Where advertising appears
Google-served ads appear on our original Insights articles and on the Markets tools we built. They do not appear on the aggregated headline feed, or on story-brief pages, because the content on those screens is not ours.
This is both a policy requirement and, we think, the correct principle regardless. Advertising placed against another publication's headline monetizes their reporting. The distinction costs us revenue on our highest-traffic surface, which is the honest reason to state it publicly rather than bury it: a commitment that is expensive is worth more than one that is free.
What we will not do
Stated concretely, so it can be checked against our behaviour:
- We will not host full third-party articles, in a reader view or anywhere else.
- We will not publish machine-generated text as though a person reported it.
- We will not obscure the publisher behind vague continue-reading interstitials.
- We will not place ads on screens whose content is someone else's headline.
- We will not present data or tools as investment recommendations.
- We will not make substantive changes to published articles without a dated note.
How to hold us to this
The framework we published for judging news products applies to us: check whether the publisher is identifiable before you click, whether full articles are hosted or linked, whether original writing is labelled, and where the ads are. Those are all externally observable, which is the point of choosing them.
For corrections, editorial@huzzflow.com. For anything else, contact@huzzflow.com or the contact page. If our behaviour and this page diverge, this page is wrong, and telling us is a genuine favour.