Editorial Policy

Our Editorial Mission

ISC Defence Intelligence publishes open-source intelligence research and analysis for WOME (Weapons, Ordnance, Munitions, and Explosives) professionals, explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) practitioners, munitions engineers, and members of the defence and security community.

Our editorial mission is to deliver rigorous, standards-grounded, and independently verified analysis of defence procurement, industrial developments, regulatory changes, and capability advancements. All content is sourced from publicly available information and conforms to NATO STANAG 2022 methodology.

Editorial Independence

ISC Defence Intelligence maintains absolute editorial independence. We:

• Accept no commercial payments or advertising that influences editorial coverage
• Have no business relationships with defence manufacturers or suppliers that could create conflicts of interest
• Do not permit sponsors or advertisers to influence story selection or analysis
• Publicly disclose any partnerships that might affect editorial judgment
• Maintain independent governance and decision-making

Source Evaluation — NATO STANAG 2022

All published analysis applies NATO STANAG 2022 methodology for source evaluation and attribution. Sources are classified on two dimensions:

Reliability Scale (A to F)

Rating	Definition
A	Completely reliable. Official government sources, verified primary documents, published standards bodies.
B	Usually reliable. Quality broadsheet media, established think-tanks, named expert sources.
C	Fairly reliable. Regional media, industry reports, specialist blogs with identified authors.
D	Not usually reliable. Trade publications, anonymous commentary, social media from unnamed sources.
E	Unreliable. Unverified claims, conspiracy theories, deliberate misinformation.
F	Cannot be judged. Source unknown, context missing, or authenticity unverifiable.

Credibility Scale (1 to 6)

Rating	Definition
1	Confirmed. Corroborated by multiple independent A/B sources or primary documentation.
2	Probably true. Consistent reporting from A/B sources with minor discrepancies.
3	Possibly true. Single B-source reporting or multiple C sources with consistency.
4	Doubtful. D sources or A/B sources with significant unexplained inconsistencies.
5	Improbable. D/E sources, contradicted by A/B sources, or significant credibility gaps.
6	Cannot be judged. Insufficient information or context to assess.

AI-Assisted Research and Writing

ISC Defence Intelligence uses artificial intelligence tools for research, fact-checking, data analysis, document drafting, and translation. We disclose this practice transparently.

AI-assisted processes: Research organisation, initial draft composition, data structure analysis, translation support, and editorial enhancement.

Human review: All analysis is reviewed and verified by human experts before publication. ISC Defence Intelligence takes full editorial responsibility for all published content, regardless of AI tools used.

No AI-only articles: All published pieces are reviewed by qualified human editors with subject-matter expertise before publication.

Disclosure: Where AI tools have materially influenced research or analysis methodology, this is disclosed to readers.

Corrections and Amendments

Correction Procedure

• Minor corrections: Typos, stylistic improvements, or minor factual updates are corrected silently with a note at the bottom of the article indicating the update date.
• Factual corrections: Substantive corrections to factual claims appear at the top of the article with clear explanation of what was corrected and why.
• Retractions: In rare cases where an article's core claim is invalidated, the entire article may be retracted with full public notice.

Submitting a Correction

If you identify an error in a published article, please contact us:

Email: editorial@integratedsynergy.co.uk
Response time: We aim to respond within 48 hours

Right of Reply

Individuals, organisations, or official bodies mentioned in critical context in our articles have the right to submit a response for publication. We provide a 30-day window from publication.

Right of Reply Conditions

• Response must be factual and directly address claims in the article
• Must be limited to approximately 300 words
• Must not constitute further criticism or attack
• Must not be legally defamatory or abusive

Accepted responses will be published with an editor's note indicating that this is a right of reply submission. They will appear as a response to the original article, not as editorial content.

Complaint Procedure

Step 1 — Editorial Contact

Send your complaint to: editorial@integratedsynergy.co.uk

Include: Article title/date, specific claim disputed, explanation of your concern

Step 2 — Editorial Response

The Editorial Director will respond within 20 working days with:

• Explanation of editorial methodology and source evaluation
• Explanation of why the article meets our editorial standards, or
• Agreement that a correction or retraction is warranted

Step 3 — Escalation

If you are dissatisfied with the editorial response, you may escalate to the Managing Director:

Email: director@integratedsynergy.co.uk

Step 4 — External Resolution

ISC Defence Intelligence is not subject to IMPRESS or other press regulatory bodies. However, we remain subject to:

• English law (defamation, copyright, data protection)
• UK ICO data protection oversight
• Applicable regulatory and legal remedies available through courts

Conflict of Interest

ISC Defence Intelligence maintains strict conflict-of-interest policies:

• Staff and contributors disclose any financial interests in defence companies, government contracts, or related organisations
• No contributor may write about an organisation where they have financial or family interests
• Consulting clients are disclosed if they may be affected by published analysis
• All declared conflicts are managed through editorial oversight or recusal

Ethical Standards

All ISC Defence Intelligence journalism adheres to:

• Accuracy and verification of all claims
• Respect for confidential sources when legally and ethically appropriate
• Clear distinction between fact, analysis, and opinion
• Transparency about methodology and source limitations
• Avoidance of sensationalism or misleading headlines
• Fair representation of alternative viewpoints

Contact Us