Editorial Policy

Shurman Media is an independent conservative publication owned by Mike Shurman of 2Tech Computing Inc. Our articles are researched and drafted by an automated newsroom, checked by machines against the sources they cite, and overseen by a human editor. This page explains how that works and what we hold ourselves to.

What we are

We publish news and analysis across six sections: News, Money, Culture, Science, Technology, and Opinion, our home for human-written commentary. We write from a conservative point of view and we say so. A reader should never have to guess where we stand. What we owe the reader in return is the record: what happened, who said it, when, and where the document is.

How an article is made

Every morning an automated research desk searches the web for the day’s stories in each section, reads the coverage, and proposes candidates. A writing model drafts an original article from those sources. It does not copy text from anyone. Before an article can appear on the site it passes through a gate that no human can skip:

• Every cited web address is fetched. If the page does not load, the citation fails.
• A second model reads each cited page and confirms it actually supports the claim attributed to it. If it does not, the citation fails.
• The draft is compared word by word against the pages it cites. Any run of ten identical words outside a short marked quotation fails the article.
• The draft is checked for length, for the required framing contrast, for its sourcing minimum, and for our writing standard.

An article that passes every check publishes. An article that fails any check is held for a human editor, who reads it and decides. Held articles that nobody reviews within two days are discarded. They are never published by default.

The framing contrast

Every article contains a section that shows how at least two other outlets framed the same story and what the difference reveals. This is the part of our work that does not exist anywhere else, and it is the reason we exist. We would rather show you the framing than tell you what to think about it.

Sources

We search broadly. We prefer primary documents, official records, transcripts, court filings and company statements, and we prefer conservative and independent outlets, cross-checked against each other where they disagree. Mainstream reporting is still cited so that its framing can be seen and questioned. Every source used in an article is listed beneath it with a link to the original. We do not cite pages we could not open.

Living people

Canadian defamation law gives no shelter to a publication that asserts as fact what it cannot prove. So any factual claim about a named living person is stated as what a named source reported, never as our own assertion. We do not attribute motive, intent or secret coordination to a named individual as established fact. We report that a source alleges it, and we say who the source is. Any article that names a living person and makes an accusation is held for a human editor regardless of every other check.

Copyright

What this site does is report on the reporting: we read what other outlets have already published, summarise it in our own words, and tell you where to find the original. That is not a loophole, it is the actual legal basis a Canadian publication stands on. The Copyright Act lets anyone deal fairly with someone else’s work for the purpose of news reporting or criticism and review, provided the source is named (sections 29.1 and 29.2). Every citation on this site links back to the outlet it came from, which is that requirement, not a courtesy.

Three checks enforce the “fairly” part automatically, before anything publishes: a run of ten identical words against a cited page fails the article outright; a second, separate check catches writing that is too structurally close to a source even when the wording differs; and a hard limit on how much of any one article can be direct quotation. We can tighten any of these further for a specific source, region, or outlet on request, the same setting we use for Canadian defamation law where it demands more care than usual.

If we get this wrong — a passage too close to its source, an image that shouldn’t have run, a citation that should not have been made — write to Contact. We correct or remove the material and record it on our Corrections page, the same notice-and-notice process described in full on our Terms of Use. We would rather take something down on your say-so and be wrong than leave it up and be right.

Writing standard

Full plain sentences, the way an informed person would explain a story across a table. No slogans, no fragments, no “X, not Y” tricks. Canadian spelling.

Images

Hero images are generated illustrations, symbolic by design. They never depict a real, identifiable person. They are labelled as illustrations.

What the machines do not decide

The point of view is the owner’s. The sections, the standing instructions to the research desk, the sources we prefer and the sources we refuse are set by the editor, and every one of those settings is written down. The machines find and draft. The gate checks. A human owns the judgement, and a human owns the mistakes.

Corrections

When we get something wrong we correct it in the article, note the correction at the bottom, and list it on our Corrections page. Write to us at Contact.