How Red String Reports
Every factual claim on Red String is attributed to a named primary source — a court filing, government document, peer-reviewed study, official report, or named expert statement. Red String does not publish claims beyond what cited sources establish. This page documents those standards in full.
Source Methodology
Red String publishes investigative journalism grounded exclusively in primary sources. A primary source is defined as:
- Court records, filings, and judicial opinions
- Government documents, official reports, and agency orders
- Congressional records, committee letters, and inspector general reports
- Peer-reviewed research published in named academic journals
- Regulatory enforcement orders, SEC filings, and federal register entries
- Named expert testimony and documented public statements
- Verified investigative reporting by named outlets with documented records of accuracy
Red String does not rely on anonymous sources, unverified social media claims, or inference beyond what the documented record establishes. Where the record is incomplete, that gap is noted explicitly within the article.
Factual Claim Standards
Every specific factual claim — figures, names, dates, events, institutional conduct — is sourced to a specific document cited within or at the end of the article. Where a claim is contested or disputed by the named party, that dispute is represented fairly within the article.
Characterizations used in Red String articles (e.g., describing institutional conduct as a "system" or "machine") represent the documented pattern established by cited sources, not conclusions beyond the record. Where editorial analysis appears, it is clearly distinguished from documented fact.
Fair Report Privilege
The majority of Red String's investigative reporting concerns matters of public record: court filings, government proceedings, regulatory actions, legislative history, and conduct of public figures and institutions. Accurate reporting of such public records is protected under the fair report privilege recognized in U.S. law, which protects journalists who accurately and fairly report on official proceedings and public documents.
All named individuals and institutions appearing in Red String's investigations either (a) are public figures whose conduct is a matter of public record, (b) are named in court filings or official proceedings that are cited within the article, or (c) have made documented public statements that are quoted or paraphrased with attribution.
Defamation Standards
Red String applies the following standards to all published content:
- Truth: All factual claims are sourced to named documents. Truth is an absolute defense to defamation.
- Public figures: Investigations concerning public figures (corporate executives, elected officials, public institutions) are evaluated under the actual malice standard. Red String does not knowingly publish false information and has no reason to doubt the accuracy of its cited primary sources.
- Private individuals: Named private individuals appear only when named in court records, official proceedings, or documented expert testimony — all of which are cited in the article.
- Opinion: Editorial analysis and conclusions drawn from the documented record are clearly framed as such and are not presented as independent factual claims.
What Red String Does Not Claim
Red String investigations document what the primary record shows. They do not:
- Assert criminal guilt for individuals not convicted of crimes
- Assert conclusions beyond what cited sources establish
- Reproduce claims from secondary sources without tracing them to primary documentation
- Characterize unresolved questions as settled facts
Where investigations involve ongoing litigation, unresolved investigations, or contested findings, this status is noted explicitly.
Corrections Policy
Red String is committed to accuracy. If you believe a factual claim in any Red String article is in error — and can provide a primary source establishing the error — please contact us. We review all factual corrections and publish corrections prominently within the relevant article.
Corrections requests must identify: (1) the specific claim in dispute, (2) the primary source establishing the error, and (3) the accurate version of the claim. We do not respond to demands for removal of accurate, sourced information.
Independence
Red String is an independent investigative publication. It has no institutional affiliation with any political party, advocacy organization, law firm, or corporate entity. Its editorial decisions are made independently. Red String does not accept payment for coverage or placement.
Red String's investigations cover matters of documented public concern: institutional conduct, government accountability, public health, and the documented record of events. The publication has no position on political parties or candidates and does not endorse political platforms.
About the Publication
Red String was founded on the principle that the most important investigations are the ones that trace documented connections through primary sources — not speculation, not anonymous tips, not inference beyond the record. The name refers to the investigative practice of mapping documented connections between entities, events, and institutions using the actual primary record.