Editorial Standards | Free China Movement

Free China Movement (FCM) publishes news analysis, commentary, historical research, policy research, archival materials, statements, and other public-interest information concerning China, human rights, democratic development, constitutional government, and related international affairs.

Our editorial standards are intended to make clear to readers how we distinguish evidence from analysis, how we handle uncertainty, and how we correct mistakes.

Accuracy Before Speed

FCM seeks to publish information that is accurate, appropriately sourced, and presented in context. For factual reporting and research, we seek to identify the original or most authoritative source when reasonably available; corroborate consequential claims through additional independent evidence when possible; distinguish confirmed facts from allegations, estimates, interpretations, and developing information; preserve important context that could materially affect a reader’s understanding; and update developing stories when significant new information becomes available.

Being first is less important than being accurate.

News, Analysis and Opinion

FCM distinguishes among factual reporting, research and analysis, institutional positions, and individual opinion. News and research materials should not present an inference or organizational judgment as an established fact. Editorials, statements, and commentaries may advocate positions consistent with FCM’s mission. Factual assertions within those materials remain subject to our standards for accuracy and sourcing.

Sources

We prefer primary and authoritative sources whenever reasonably available, including official documents, court records, legislation, government publications, original statements, contemporaneous records, archival materials, firsthand testimony, and established research. Secondary reporting may be used to provide corroboration, context, or information for which primary evidence is unavailable.

Readers should ordinarily be able to understand the basis for significant factual claims through citations, links, source descriptions, or accompanying research notes.

Source Independence

FCM evaluates evidence according to its reliability rather than whether the source agrees with FCM’s views. Chinese Communist Party and Mainland Chinese Communist Government sources may be cited when they provide relevant official statements, laws, statistics, decisions, or records. Their claims are not automatically treated as independently verified facts. The same principle applies to governments, political organizations, advocacy groups, individuals, and other interested parties.

Anonymous and Confidential Sources

FCM prefers attributable sources. Confidential or anonymous sourcing should be used only when there is a legitimate reason to protect a source and the information has sufficient public-interest value. Where disclosure could expose a person to persecution, retaliation, imprisonment, loss of employment, or other serious harm, protecting that person’s identity may take precedence over public attribution.

Historical and Archival Materials

Historical research may involve incomplete, contradictory, damaged, translated, or politically contested records. When evidence is uncertain, FCM should describe that uncertainty rather than manufacture certainty. Where significant accounts conflict, we seek to identify the disagreement, evaluate the available evidence, and explain the basis for our conclusions.

Allegations and Disputed Claims

Serious allegations concerning identifiable people or organizations require particular care. FCM should clearly identify allegations as allegations unless sufficient reliable evidence establishes the underlying facts. Where practicable and appropriate, materially affected parties should be given a fair opportunity for their relevant position or response to be represented.

Quotations and Translation

Quotations should preserve the substantive meaning of the original statement. Translations may be edited for readability but should not materially change meaning. When interpretation of a term is consequential or disputed, the original-language wording may also be provided.

Independence

Editorial conclusions are determined by evidence, research, editorial judgment, and FCM’s stated mission. Donors, advertisers, political organizations, governments, technology providers, distribution partners, and outside contributors should not determine FCM’s factual conclusions. Potential material conflicts of interest should be disclosed when they are relevant to evaluating published work.

Human Rights and Dignity

Reporting about political prisoners, dissidents, victims of persecution, families, minors, and vulnerable individuals requires particular attention to dignity and potential harm. Publication of personally identifying or sensitive information should be weighed against its legitimate public-interest value and foreseeable risks.

Corrections

FCM corrects material factual errors when they are identified. Corrections should be made transparently and proportionately to the significance of the error in accordance with our Corrections Policy.

Artificial Intelligence

FCM may use artificial-intelligence tools to assist research, translation, organization, comparison, drafting, and other editorial work. AI output is not itself treated as evidence. Material published under FCM’s name remains subject to human responsibility and our sourcing, review, and correction standards. See our AI-Assisted Research & Human Review Policy.

Reader Participation

Readers, researchers, witnesses, journalists, and individuals represented in our materials are encouraged to identify possible errors or provide additional evidence. Challenges supported by credible evidence are part of responsible research, not an obstacle to it.

Last reviewed: September 2026