Newsroom Methodology

How Newsroom signals are calculated (informative only)

Purpose

This page explains how Newsroom scores and signals are generated.

It exists to make mechanical signal aggregation visible — not to justify conclusions, assign credibility, evaluate truth, or recommend belief or action.

No score displayed in the Newsroom constitutes a claim about correctness, intent, morality, reliability, or trustworthiness.

What Newsroom Scores Are — and Are Not

What they are

Newsroom scores are descriptive aggregates derived from observable, non-semantic signals present in published news content and its update history.

They summarize patterns of publication behavior, not the meaning, validity, or intent of claims.

What they are not

Newsroom scores are not:

• Judgments of truth or falsity
• Rankings of credibility, quality, or trust
• Endorsements or warnings
• Measures of intent, morality, or ethics
• Recommendations for belief or action

No optimization target exists behind the scores.

Design Constraints (Non-Negotiable)

The Newsroom scoring system is constrained by the following invariants:

• No semantic interpretation — content meaning is not evaluated
• No moral weighting — signals are not ranked by virtue, harm, or value
• No hidden assumptions — all contributing signal classes are disclosed
• No authority emission — scores do not instruct, advise, or recommend
• No optimization loop — the system does not adapt to influence outcomes

Signal Classes Used

Scores are computed from the presence, frequency, and timing of observable publication signals. These include, but are not limited to:

Publication Structure Signals

• Article count and publication cadence
• Update and revision frequency
• Correction presence (binary, not qualitative)
• Retraction events and latency

Attribution Signals

• Use of named sources (presence only)
• Citation density
• External reference linking (presence only)

Temporal Signals

• Update timing relative to breaking events
• Revision clustering or delay patterns

Cross-Source Signals

• Divergence and convergence patterns across outlets
• Story persistence or decay over time

Editorial Surface Signals

• Headline volatility
• Structural consistency across updates

No signal is interpreted as “good” or “bad.” Signals are counted, not judged.

Structural Asymmetry Signals (Commonly Described as Bias)

Some Newsroom signals surface structural asymmetries in publication behavior that are commonly labeled as “bias” in public discourse.

In Newsroom, these signals are treated strictly as observable structural patterns, not as indicators of intent, ideology, or ethics.

• Structural Directionality — persistence of directional coverage patterns over time
• Linguistic Polarity Density — frequency of high-polarity language tokens without semantic interpretation
• Source Concentration Pattern — recurrence and diversity of cited sources, without credibility assessment
• Framing Persistence Signal — repeated structural framing patterns across related coverage
• Contextual Inclusion Variance — variance in contextual elements included or omitted across comparable events

These signals describe structure, not motive. They do not imply correctness, fault, or trustworthiness.

What a Higher or Lower Score Means

A higher or lower score reflects only a difference in the aggregate configuration of observable signals.

It does not imply:

• Higher accuracy
• Greater reliability
• Better or worse journalism
• Malicious or benevolent intent

Scores are comparative descriptors, not evaluative measures.

Why Scores Are Shown At All

Scores exist to:

• Make structural patterns visible
• Prevent hidden authority or opaque summarization
• Allow independent scrutiny of aggregation logic
• Reduce reliance on reputation or narrative framing

They are a lens, not a verdict.

What Newsroom Refuses to Do

The Newsroom explicitly refuses to:

• Rank outlets by trust
• Recommend sources
• Suppress or promote stories
• Collapse signal complexity into moral conclusions
• Replace human judgment

Any system that does so would exceed its legitimacy.

Known Limitations

• Scores do not capture truth or falsity
• Scores do not account for context or intent
• Scores may surface neutral or incidental patterns
• Scores can be misinterpreted if treated as authority

Misuse or over-interpretation is a known risk and is not mitigated by additional scoring.

Interpretation Boundary

If you find yourself asking:

“What should I believe or do based on this score?”

You have crossed the intended boundary.

The Newsroom provides visibility, not guidance.

Revision Policy

This methodology is:

• Public
• Versioned
• Additive only

Any change to signal classes or aggregation logic is documented and historically accessible. Silent edits are prohibited.

Status

• Status: Informative infrastructure
• Authority: None
• Function: Signal visibility
• Alignment: Canon-compliant

Newsroom Methodology · Canonical · Informative Only · Moral Clarity AI