Sources & Methodology — How StateLeak Reports and What It Relies On
Why Methodology Matters
The credibility of journalism depends not only on what is published but on how it was reported. Readers have a right to understand the evidentiary basis of the stories they read. This page explains how StateLeak's journalism is built.
Types of Sources We Use
Primary Source Documents. Government records, internal memos, official correspondence, court filings, financial disclosures, and leaked institutional materials constitute our most valued source category. These documents speak directly. They require authentication, not interpretation.
Human Sources. Individuals with direct, firsthand knowledge of the events or conditions we report on. These may be current or former officials, employees, researchers, or eyewitnesses. Human sources are assessed for access, reliability, and potential bias before their testimony informs our reporting.
Open Source Intelligence (OSINT). Publicly available information — satellite imagery, financial records, corporate registrations, procurement databases, public statements, and digital traces — forms a significant part of our investigative toolkit. OSINT is used to corroborate, contradict, and contextualise information from other source types.
Academic and Expert Literature. Peer-reviewed research, specialist analysis, and expert commentary are used to provide context and to test our understanding of technical or complex subjects.
Other Journalism. Reporting from other reputable outlets may inform our understanding of a subject but is not treated as primary verification. We do not republish another outlet's scoop as independently confirmed unless we have confirmed it independently.
Document Authentication Process
Leaked documents submitted to StateLeak undergo a systematic authentication review. This includes examination of document metadata where available, format and typographical consistency with known authentic examples, internal consistency of dates, names, and references, and comparison against other corroborating evidence. Documents that fail authentication are not published. Documents that pass are described in reporting with appropriate caveats about the limits of verification.
How Investigations Are Structured
StateLeak investigations follow a structured process: an initial tip or document triggers a research phase, during which the editorial team maps available evidence and identifies gaps. The reporting phase involves source development, document collection, and expert consultation. The verification phase applies our fact-checking standards to all core claims. The editorial phase involves review, legal assessment where required, and right-of-reply to named subjects. Publication follows only when all phases are complete.
On Anonymous Sources
We use anonymous sources when the public interest requires information that can only be obtained from protected sources. We do not use anonymity to shield speculation, nor to publish accusations without corroboration. When we cite an anonymous source, it means we know who they are, have assessed their reliability, and have made an editorial decision that their protection is warranted.
Transparency in Reporting
StateLeak endeavours to be explicit in its reporting about the basis of factual claims. Phrases like "according to documents reviewed by StateLeak," "a source with direct knowledge of the matter," or "as confirmed by official records" are used deliberately to signal the evidentiary basis of specific claims. We do not write with false certainty about matters where our evidence is partial or contested.
