Sources

The two largest international wire services. Both operate under strict editorial independence standards, employ reporters on the ground in conflict zones, and correct errors publicly. Their raw reporting is source material for most Western newsrooms.

Raw field data and humanitarian statistics are distinct from politically filtered resolutions. The UN's data collection arms produce primary data; its political bodies reflect member state interests. We use the former and treat the latter as political documents, not evidence. See our full UN analysis →

Wikipedia is a useful starting point and aggregator of sourced facts. It is not a reliable authority on contested definitions, and its editorial community has documented systematic biases on politically contested topics. We treat it as a pointer to primary sources, not as a primary source itself.

Led by Dr. Khalil Shikaki. Follows international polling standards with documented methodology. Its results are difficult to dismiss as Western or Israeli bias — the organization is Palestinian, polling Palestinians, for a Palestinian audience. When PCPSR data is unflattering to the Palestinian cause (e.g., 72% support for the October 7 attack in December 2023), it is among the most credible possible sources for that fact.

Primary documents — the actual treaty text, the actual transcript, the actual archived memo — are the gold standard. When the document is publicly available, we link directly to it rather than citing a journalist's summary of it.

Peer review is not a guarantee of correctness, but it subjects claims to expert challenge before publication. We note when a claim rests on one study vs. an established literature consensus.