While Investigations Index aims to be comprehensive, it’s very plausible that we’ve missed an editorial outlet that should be included.
If you think your group should be added to the feed, please get in touch. Before you do, though, please bear in mind the following rules. You must have:
- an open publishing system
By which we mean your own website or section of a website (not just posts on social media) that is free-to-read rather than behind a paywall. And it should have… - a summary feed (xml) or API
This site works on a system of xml feeds to trigger alerts and create the master list. Without xml there would be too much scraping, or worse, endless copying and pasting. You 100% need a feed. If you have an API that outputs json that would also work. And you also need… - a robust editorial framework
Investigations need good editors to make sure that it all stands up. There may well be good investigative reporters out there, blogging solo, but without a strong editorial process the work can’t be trusted to the same extent. We haven’t got time to fact-check your work. There needs to be some sort of team, and preferably a team that are named and contactable. And lastly… - a primarily UK-based operation.
This is a UK-focused service. Some UK-based publishers may be looking at international investigations, or they might be focussed solely on the UK, or even more locally. That’s fine. The scope of Investigations Index is the UK, so we aren’t including publishers from the US, and we aren’t able to include non-English publications.
So if it’s a tick to all four of those, and you aren’t in the current list, get in touch:
One last caveat: politically, we don’t particularly care where you are coming from. Pretty much all news has some political bias, it’s just a question of degree. The readers can make up their own minds. However, we don’t want to include political hit-pieces masquerading as investigations. This is for genuine investigations only.