Methodology

How RWBP keeps the evidence trail visible

See how RWBP checks sources, shows uncertainty, corrects mistakes, and keeps editorial judgment separate from funding.

Trust Model

Trust Model

Source ladderRequired

Evidence before heat

Primary records first, scientific consensus where relevant, high-quality reporting second, ideology and commentary only as framing or discovery.

Review modelRequired

Publish with receipts

Claims must separate fact, inference, opinion, allegation, and judgment. High-risk items require human review before publication.

AI policyRequired

AI-assisted, review-driven

AI can gather, summarize, compare, and draft. It cannot be the final authority on factual, legal, scientific, or safety-sensitive claims.

Editorial Guardrails

Editorial Guardrails

Review gateRequired

Do not amplify the harm

A legal and safety pass for high-risk claims: private people, violence, elections, health, disasters, defamation, and copyright-heavy media.

Funding Guardrails

Funding Guardrails

Badge ruleRequired

Recognition without influence

Badges identify support level and donor-approved display name. They never imply editorial endorsement, influence, or ownership of the topic.

Funding ledgerRequired

Show what the money made possible

Topic pages show what donations funded: source acquisition, researcher time, review work, data cleanup, visuals, or public figure dossiers.

Kickstarter modelGate

Fund scoped work, not vague vibes

New research areas have a target, scope, source plan, review risk, and publication promise before fundraising opens.