An explanation should stand up.

What you are reading now.

The current ten articles are AI-assisted sample explainers. They demonstrate the website and its editorial formats; they are not a body of reported news that has completed the process below. The sample-edition note describes their scope.

Make the evidence traceable.

Reported articles should identify their author and actual publication time, link to relevant primary material, and make the basis of consequential claims clear. Describe what was observed and by whom; distinguish a company's statement from independent evidence.

An announcement establishes that a claim was made. Further evidence is needed to establish whether a product works or a business result has been achieved. Numbers need their source, period and relevant limitations.

Separate explanation from prediction.

Interpretation should explain how the evidence supports the conclusion and acknowledge plausible alternatives. A scenario describes what could happen under stated assumptions; it should not be presented as an observed result or a certainty.

Make missing evidence and unresolved questions visible. Technical progress, commercial adoption and a viable business are different claims, each requiring support.

Keep the business question in view.

Coverage should help readers understand products, operations, competition and industry change. Fintech is part of that scope through its effects on payments, lending and financial services. Loombrief does not offer stock tips, index forecasts or personal financial advice.

Review before publication.

The planned process includes checking material claims, quotations, calculations and visual explanations before release. Reporting that makes a consequential allegation should seek a response from the subject and represent that response fairly.

AI assistance does not replace sources or accountable review. It must not be used to invent interviews, quotations, eyewitness observations or evidence. Meaningful use of generated material should be disclosed.

Show what a visual can support.

Conceptual illustrations must be labelled and accompanied by a readable explanation. They should not imply precise anatomy, a causal relationship or a documented event without support. Documentary images require accurate captions, attribution and appropriate rights.

Make substantive corrections visible.

The intended practice is to correct substantive errors with a note explaining what changed and when. An update should be distinguishable from a correction. Quietly replacing a material claim should not erase the record.

To flag an issue in the current edition, use the correction contact details and include the passage and supporting evidence.

Keep commercial relationships clear.

Advertisements and sponsored work must be visibly identified, with the sponsor named where applicable. Relevant financial or personal conflicts should be disclosed. A commercial relationship must not determine the conclusions of independent reporting or prevent a correction.

These standards are a commitment for developing the publication. They do not imply an established newsroom, completed interviews or a review process already operating at scale.