Most magazines have an editorial policy that exists in the heads of three people and gets invoked only when something goes wrong. We would rather write ours down.
We cover [subject area of the magazine]. That is deliberately broad, so here is the narrower test we actually apply: does this story tell a reader something they could not have got from the announcement? If the answer is no, we do not run it, however important the subject.
We do not accept payment for coverage. We do not run advertorial that is not clearly marked as such. Sponsored material, when we take it, carries a label at the top of the page and a different typeface. If you cannot tell the difference at a glance, we have failed.
We correct in the open. Corrections go at the foot of the piece, dated, describing what was wrong. We do not silently edit a published article to make it right, except for typos and broken links. If a piece is substantially wrong, we say so on the piece.
We name our sources wherever we can, and we say when we cannot. Anonymity is granted by the editor, not the writer, and only where there is a real reason — safety, employment, a source who would otherwise not speak. 'They asked not to be named' is not a reason.
We keep the right to be wrong in public. That is the trade for being trusted when we are right.