Editorial Policy

CurrentLens.com is an independent editorial publication covering artificial intelligence. This policy explains how we select stories, produce content, use AI assistance, handle corrections and maintain our independence from commercial relationships.

1. Mission and editorial independence

Our mission is to provide clear, accurate and useful coverage of the AI industry for readers who want substantive reporting without having to follow dozens of sources themselves.

Editorial decisions — which stories we cover, how we frame them and what analysis we include — are made entirely by our editorial team. Advertisers have no influence over our coverage. We have no investment relationships with any company we write about.

2. Source selection

We draw on a curated set of primary and secondary sources, including:

• Official announcements and press releases from AI companies and research institutions
• Peer-reviewed research papers and preprints (arXiv, academic journals)
• Established technology and science publications
• Regulatory filings, government documents and policy announcements
• Verified industry data and benchmark reports

We do not publish rumours, unverified leaks or anonymous claims without corroboration from at least one additional independent source.

3. AI assistance and human review

CurrentLens uses AI language models to assist with research aggregation, initial drafting and summarisation. Every article produced with AI assistance is reviewed by a human editor before publication. That review process includes:

• Verifying factual claims against source material
• Checking that the tone and framing are accurate and fair
• Ensuring source attribution is present and correct
• Removing or rewriting content that is thin, speculative or misleading
• Adding editorial context, analysis and perspective where appropriate

We do not publish AI-generated content that has not been reviewed. Articles that rely heavily on AI drafting are held to the same accuracy and quality standards as manually written pieces.

4. Accuracy standards

We aim to be accurate on first publication. When we are wrong, we correct it promptly and transparently. Our accuracy standards include:

• All numerical claims (model benchmarks, funding figures, timelines) are verified against primary sources
• Quoted statements are taken directly from official sources or verified transcripts
• Headlines reflect the content of the article and do not overstate or sensationalise
• Speculation and opinion are clearly distinguished from reported fact

5. Source attribution

Every article includes attribution to the primary source or sources it draws on. We link to original source material where it is publicly accessible. We do not reproduce full articles from other publications. Short quotations used for context or analysis are kept within fair use and are always attributed.

6. Corrections policy

We correct factual errors as quickly as possible. Significant corrections are noted at the top or bottom of the relevant article with a brief description of what changed and when. We do not silently remove or alter published content to cover mistakes.

To report an error, contact us at [email protected] or use the contact page. We aim to respond within one business day.

7. Conflicts of interest

Our editorial team does not hold financial positions in companies we cover. We disclose any material relationships that could affect our coverage. Sponsored content, if we publish it, is clearly labelled as such and kept editorially separate from our independent reporting.

8. Advertising and editorial separation

Advertising is clearly distinguished from editorial content at all times. Advertisers do not receive advance notice of coverage, input into editorial decisions or any preferential treatment in our reporting. Ad placements are managed independently of the editorial team.

9. Contact

Questions about our editorial standards? Reach us at [email protected] or via our contact page.