How Sarie decides what is true enough to publish.
The rules the reporting is held to, before a single word is written for you.
These are the standards every Sarie article is held to. They are enforced in the editorial process, not offered as aspiration.
Evidence, classified
Every material claim is classified by how well it is supported: verified fact, primary-source fact, attributed claim, reasonable inference, unknown, or disputed. A weaker class is never quietly promoted to a stronger one.
Independence over repetition
Ten outlets repeating one report is one source, not ten. Sarie traces claims to their origin and does not mistake syndication for corroboration.
Representative, not anecdotal
A crowd is not a population. Sarie does not infer public opinion from a single rally, thread, or viral clip; a claimed shift must be supported by longitudinal evidence such as polling, elections, or behavioural data. The question is always: compared with what?
Causation with care
"X happened because of Y" is written only when the evidence establishes it. Where motives are unknown, Sarie gives context rather than reading minds.
Novelty is required
Being current is not enough. An article must add a material fact, connection, explanation, correction, or piece of primary data that the leading coverage lacks. A good process that yields a commodity article is treated as a failure.
Corrections
When something is wrong, it is corrected promptly and visibly. Accuracy outranks being first, and it outranks being interesting.