Editorial Policy
This page sets out how The Global Insight actually works: how we choose and research articles, the extra standards health content must meet, how we date and correct things, and what happened in the 2026 relaunch. We publish it because a publication asking for your trust should show its working.
How we choose topics
We start from questions real readers ask — about their health, their businesses and their football clubs — and we take a topic on only when we can add something beyond what already ranks: clearer evidence, a more honest verdict, or a British angle the coverage lacks. We do not chase celebrity churn or trending noise; we retired that entire section in 2026.
Sourcing standards
- Health articles draw on recognised medical sources — the NHS, peer-reviewed research, and established health bodies. We describe evidence at the strength it actually has: "some studies suggest" is not "proven". Every health article is general information, never medical advice; the disclaimer applies in full.
- AI & business articles are based on direct examination of the tools where possible, with pricing checked in pounds at the time of writing. We name what we have not tested. No vendor sees coverage before publication.
- Football analysis is grounded in things that can be checked — results, statistics, official statements — and clearly separates analysis from speculation.
We never fabricate quotes, statistics or events, and we do not put a question in a headline the article fails to answer.
How articles are written and reviewed
We use modern writing tools, including AI assistance, in drafting and editing — and a human editor reviews every page before and after publication. Responsibility for what is published sits with The Global Insight editorial team, contactable directly at [email protected], not with the tools. Every article shows the byline it was published under, and the publisher remains responsible for everything on the site.
The 2026 relaunch, honestly
In mid-2026 it became clear the site's older approach — broad, fast, shallow — was not good enough, and search engines agreed. Rather than defend it, we rebuilt: every page was audited, the majority were retired outright (including the celebrity-news section), and the roughly one hundred articles that remained were re-edited, retitled, and are being progressively re-reviewed against the standards on this page. Retired pages redirect to the closest relevant section. We would rather publish a small archive we stand behind than a large one we cannot.
Dates
Every article shows its original publication date and, where the substance has changed since, an updated date. We do not touch dates to fake freshness.
Corrections
When we get something wrong, we correct the article promptly; for significant errors we add a note recording what changed. To report an error, email [email protected] with "Correction" in the subject and a link to the piece. Corrections are acknowledged within 2 working days and are the first thing we deal with each day.
If we write about you
People we cover have a right of reply. If you are the subject of an article and believe something is inaccurate, unfair or seriously out of date, contact us. We will review it against this policy, correct what is wrong, and where appropriate update the piece to reflect your response. We do not delete accurate reporting on request, but we always listen first.
Independence
Editorial decisions are made by the editorial team alone. The site carries no advertising or sponsorship today; if commercial content ever appears it will be clearly labelled, will have no influence on editorial coverage, and no advertiser will see, approve or veto an article before publication. We do not sell links, and we do not accept payment for coverage — positive, negative, or its removal.