Mill Media publishes seven local news titles — in Manchester, Sheffield, Liverpool, London, Glasgow, Birmingham and Leeds — funded by our readers. That model only works if our readers trust us. These are the principles we hold ourselves to, and the processes we use to make sure we meet them.

1. Accuracy comes first

We publish what we can stand up. Every factual claim in our journalism should be traceable to a document, a source, a recording, or the direct observation of one of our reporters. Where something is contested, we say so. Where we are relying on a single source, we weigh that carefully before publishing.

We do not publish rumour, we do not aggregate other outlets’ claims without checking them, and we do not stretch a story further than the evidence supports.

2. We give people the right of reply

Anyone who is the subject of new criticism, allegation or significant scrutiny in one of our stories is contacted before we publish. This is not a formality. It means:

• We put the specifics to them. Not a vague summary, but the actual allegations, findings and quotes we intend to publish, in enough detail that they can respond meaningfully.
• We give them reasonable time. Usually a working day and longer for complex stories or where someone needs to consult lawyers or colleagues.
• We publish their response fairly. If someone answers, their side goes into the story at a length and in a position that reflects its substance — not buried in the final paragraph.
• We record it when they decline. If someone chooses not to respond, we say so, and we say what we asked them about.
• We correct course if they change the picture. If a response undermines our reporting, we go back and check again rather than publishing anyway.

We take particular care with people who are not public figures and have not sought attention.

3. We follow the Editors’ Code of Practice

Our journalism adheres to the Editors’ Code of Practice, the industry standard covering accuracy, privacy, harassment, intrusion into grief, reporting on children, confidential sources, and the use of subterfuge. Our reporters and editors are expected to know it and to raise it when a story raises questions under it.

Where the Code allows an exception in the public interest — for example, on privacy or on covert methods — that judgement is made by a senior editor before the work happens, not justified after the fact, and we keep a record of the reasoning.

4. We protect our sources

Confidentiality, once given, is absolute. We do not reveal the identity of a confidential source, and we design our reporting and record-keeping so that we cannot be compelled to. We are careful about promising anonymity in the first place, and we explain to sources what we can and cannot protect them from. We do not grant anonymity simply so that someone can attack a rival without accountability.

5. Every story is edited by an experienced editor

No story is published in a Mill Media title on the say-so of the person who wrote it. Every piece is read and edited by at least one editor other than the writer, and our senior editors include journalists who have worked at the Washington Post, the New York Times and the Guardian. Investigations and other high-risk stories go through more than one editor.

Editing at Mill Media is not a proofread. Editors interrogate the sourcing, ask what the reporter has actually seen, test the fairness of the framing, and push back where the evidence is thinner than the language.

6. Stories with legal risk are reviewed by lawyers

Where a story raises questions of defamation, privacy, data protection, contempt of court or reporting restrictions, it is read by specialist media lawyers before publication. Legal review is a check on accuracy and fairness as much as on risk — but it is a check, not a veto by nervousness. We publish difficult stories about powerful people. We simply make sure we are on solid ground when we do.

7. We are independent of the people we cover

We are funded primarily by our subscribers. Advertisers, sponsors and commercial partners have no influence over editorial coverage and no advance sight of stories. Commercial content is clearly labelled as such and is never presented as journalism.

Reporters declare conflicts of interest to their editor — financial interests, personal relationships, prior involvement with a subject — and we recuse people where a conflict cannot be managed. Where a connection is relevant to a story, we disclose it in the story.

8. We correct our mistakes openly

We will sometimes get things wrong. When we do, we correct the record promptly and visibly, on the story itself and, where the error is significant, in our newsletters. We do not quietly amend articles to erase an error, and we do not delete stories to avoid dealing with a complaint.

9. How to complain

If you believe something we have published is inaccurate or falls short of these standards or the Editors’ Code, please email info@millmediaco.uk within three months of publication, including your contact details, the title and URL of the article, and a specific description of what you object to and why.

Your complaint will be read by an editor and discussed with our other editors and the reporter concerned. We aim to reply within three weeks. If we conclude that a correction or apology is warranted, we will publish it within a week of that decision. Complaints are handled sensitively and in line with UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018.

Our full complaints policy is available on each of our sites.

---

These guidelines apply across all Mill Media titles. They are reviewed periodically by the editorial leadership team.