These standards govern everything API Automations publishes: index documentation and data cards, research and explainers, posts and video segments, product and methodology notes, and any narrative we supply to a partner platform for publication on its surfaces. They describe how we source and verify material, how we separate record from interpretation, where automation ends and human review begins, how commercial relationships are kept away from editorial judgment, and how to get something corrected, answered, or withdrawn.
They supplement our Terms & Conditions, our Privacy Policy, our Data Compliance commitments, and our Open APIs & Public Data policy.
Scope and purpose
In short: We publish derived signals with their sources attached, a person reviews narrative before it ships, and commercial placement never buys editorial treatment.
These standards apply to apiautomations.com, to the product surfaces we operate, and to material we produce for publication on a partner's surfaces. They apply to material published under our editorial imprint Data Privacy Today, including the What You Need to Know in 90 Seconds series.
API Automations operates as API Automations, LLC (Los Angeles, California, United States) and API Automations, LTD (London, United Kingdom). Both entities are bound by these standards, and the entity responsible for a given surface does not change what the material has to clear.
Where we publish through a partner platform that maintains its own editorial standards, both sets apply to the material we supply. Where they differ, the stricter requirement governs, and nothing in this document reduces what a partner commits to on its own surfaces.
These standards are a statement of our editorial practice. They are not legal advice, they do not create a contractual right for any third party, and they do not modify the Terms & Conditions, which govern your use of our products and services.
Our editorial mission
Education is the foundation of trust. API Automations exists to make data infrastructure, public records, and the economics of data legible to people who are not specialists in them, and every editorial decision we make is measured against whether it leaves a reader better able to understand how the underlying systems actually work.
As our library of indices, research, and explainers expands, we hold that work to accuracy, clarity, and ethical responsibility rather than to reach. We would rather publish less and be relied upon than publish more and be checked.
What API Automations is, and is not
API Automations is a data infrastructure company. We build and operate consent-aware pipelines, derived indices, and curated delivery between first-party data owners and the organizations licensed to receive it.
We are not a news outlet, and we do not republish source content as journalism. Where we publish a derived index, we publish an indicator computed from source material rather than a copy of someone else's dataset. We say this here because it bounds what these standards can promise. We do not run a newsroom, and we do not hold ourselves out as one.
Records we handle on behalf of a data owner or a licensee are governed by that agreement and by our Data Compliance commitments, not by this document. These standards govern what we publish.
Where our material appears
Our segments, documentation, and data products are published across our own channels, our product surfaces, and partner publishing avenues.
| SURFACE | WHAT APPEARS THERE | ACCESS |
|---|---|---|
| apiautomations.com | Research, posts, explainers, methodology and policy | Public |
| PEPI Index | Trade-policy pressure index, data cards, methodology | Public |
| Estate Index | Probate and property records index | Public |
| Cannabis Research Index | Market price index and documentation | Public |
| Post Automation | Media post-production workflow documentation | Public |
| Criminal Enterprise Network Index (CENI) | Investigative records index | Access-controlled |
| Sports Database | Multi-sport data platform | Access-controlled |
| Research LLM | Proprietary research model | Access-controlled |
| Civic Forecast | Civic-education signals, where we are the data and technology partner | Partner surface |
| RealSynq | Real-time signal enrichment for programmatic environments | Partner surface |
Access-controlled products are not published to the open web, and their documentation is released to licensed users under the terms of their agreement. These standards still govern what that documentation says.
Wherever our material runs, these editorial standards apply.
How we create material
- Research and verification. Every index, segment, and explainer is grounded in primary public records, reputable sources, technical documentation, and first-hand domain experience.
- Expert input. Editorial work is done alongside the engineers, analysts, and compliance specialists who build and operate the pipeline, so that what a card says matches what the data actually supports.
- Clarity first. We simplify without oversimplifying. Material is written to serve developers, researchers, compliance officers, journalists, and decision-makers alike, and we do not trade precision for a cleaner sentence.
Sourcing and verification in practice
- We build on primary records. Where a primary record exists, we use it in preference to a secondary description of it.
- Figures are verified against their originating source before publication, and the identifier that lets a reader retrieve the same record is carried with the figure wherever the source provides one.
- Every data card attributes its source and links back to it. Attribution stays visually present on cards, charts, and briefs.
- When a number changes at the source, our surface reflects the update rather than preserving the figure we published first.
- Where a source publishes methodology, revision, or version metadata, we preserve it so a reader can judge freshness and provenance.
- We do not present a single source's estimate as settled fact where the underlying measure is genuinely contested, and we say when a figure is provisional, modeled, or subject to later revision.
Our sourcing obligations to the publishers of public and licensed data (attribution, access behavior, and republication limits) are set out in Open APIs & Public Data.
Separating record from interpretation
Structured data and narrative context are kept separate by design and are visually distinguishable on every surface. A reader should never have to guess which part of a page is a record and which part is our reading of it.
Editorial framing does not alter underlying figures. Narrative may explain, contextualize, or note the limits of a number; it does not restate the number differently from the source, and it does not silently exclude records that complicate the framing.
Indices, scores, severity bands, forecasts, and probabilistic estimates are analytical outputs, not statements of fact. They are labeled as estimates wherever they appear. An index value is a measurement of what we chose to measure, computed by a published method, not an authoritative verdict about its subject.
Automation and the human review gate
In short: Automation prepares the draft. A person holds the review gate, and nothing publishes without passing it.
Our pipeline is automated end to end for acquisition, normalization, alignment, and signal derivation. That automation produces the structured indicators shown in our products. It does not create a substitute dataset, and it does not enable record-level access where the source terms do not permit it.
Automated systems may be used to prepare draft narrative, summaries, tags, and headlines. Every narrative asset is source-aware and release-checked before distribution: it carries its source and credit line, its release status is confirmed, and a human reviews it against the underlying record. Nothing publishes to a site, product surface, or partner platform without passing that review. A person, not a system, is accountable for what appears.
Source and partner data is not used to train, test, or improve any automated system outside the scope of its license. Our Research LLM is trained only on material we are licensed to use for that purpose.
Automation makes mistakes at a different rate and in a different shape than people do. If you find an automated error, such as a confident figure with no support or a source that does not say what we claim it says, report it under the corrections process below and say so, and we will treat it as a review-gate failure rather than an isolated typo.
Nonpartisan and non-prejudicial framing
We do not endorse, oppose, rate, or recommend any candidate, party, campaign, ballot measure, or elected official, and we do not accept sponsorship from candidates, campaigns, parties, or political action committees for placement on our surfaces.
Where an index touches policy, enforcement, or litigation, it describes what records show and the range of mainstream interpretations of them, without advocating a position. Covering a subject is not a judgment about that subject, and the prominence we give a record reflects analytical significance rather than a view about whom it favors.
This carries particular weight for records concerning identifiable people. The presence of a person or organization in an investigative or enforcement index is not an assertion of guilt, liability, or wrongdoing. Allegations, filings, and charges are recorded as allegations, filings, and charges; legal posture is stated separately from evidentiary weight; and dispositions are carried alongside the records they resolve.
Nonpartisan does not mean every claim gets equal weight. Where records plainly show something, we say so.
Editorial independence
In short: Sponsors and licensees can buy placement, access, and visibility. They cannot buy coverage, framing, favorable treatment, or advance review.
Our editorial work operates independently from our sales, licensing, and business development functions. No sponsor, partner, advertiser, licensee, or data supplier dictates what we publish unless that involvement is disclosed transparently in the item itself.
What a commercial relationship does not buy
- Influence over which records, indices, or signals we cover, or how prominently.
- Review of, or approval over, editorial material before publication.
- Removal, softening, or delay of unfavorable material, including material about the sponsor, licensee, or supplier.
- Exclusion from an index whose published criteria the organization meets.
- Any representation that a sponsor endorses, or is endorsed by, the data shown near its placement.
Supplying data to us does not exempt a supplier from appearing in our indices. Where we publish about an organization that funds, sponsors, supplies, or partners with us, we disclose that relationship in the item itself.
Conflicts of interest
People who produce or review our editorial material disclose financial, professional, familial, and political interests that a reasonable reader would want weighed, and step back from material where such an interest would bear on the judgment being made.
Where a conflict is disclosed but the material still merits publication, we publish the disclosure with it rather than quietly reassigning the work.
Partner, affiliate, and sponsorship disclosure
Some material may include affiliate, backlink, syndication, or sponsored links or mentions. Where it does, that relationship is disclosed in the item itself rather than only in this policy, and we include such a link only where the product or service meets the same technical and ethical standards we apply to our own work. A commercial relationship never converts into a recommendation we would not otherwise make.
All sponsored placements are clearly and visibly labeled at the point a reader encounters them.
We do not run surveillance advertising, we do not sell user-level data, and partner reporting is aggregate-only.
Corrections and content updates
We proactively review and update published material to reflect evolving records, regulation, and methodology. When we get something wrong, we fix it and say that we fixed it. We do not silently edit a published claim into a different one.
Routine refreshes as a source updates are not corrections and are reflected by the retrieval timestamp rather than by a note. Corrections and retractions stay attached to the item; we do not remove the record of having been wrong.
| CHANGE TYPE | WHEN WE USE IT | HOW IT IS MARKED |
|---|---|---|
| Update | The source revised, restated, or superseded its own record and our surface follows it | Timestamp refreshed |
| Clarification | What we published was accurate but the wording invited a materially wrong reading | Dated note |
| Correction | We published something factually wrong, or attributed a figure to the wrong source | Dated correction |
| Retraction | The basis for the item does not hold and context cannot repair it | Withdrawn and logged |
A change to an index's methodology is not a correction to the values it previously produced. Where a method changes, we say what changed, when it took effect, and whether prior values were restated.
Reporting an error
Write to contact@apiautomations.com with the page or card, the figure or statement at issue, what is wrong, and the source that shows the correct information if you have it. We aim to acknowledge within three to five business days and to tell you what we did or why we did not act.
That is an editorial timeline, and it does not govern requests to delete personal information. Those run on the statutory timeline, which is shorter, and our preference tooling is built to act on a deletion request in real time rather than on a review cycle. See our Privacy Policy and Data Privacy commitments.
Errors about a source's own data or attribution are also covered by our Open APIs & Public Data policy.
Right of reply, amendment, and unpublishing
If you are named in, or identifiable from, material we publish and you believe it is inaccurate or unfair, write to contact@apiautomations.com. We will review it on the merits, and where a response is warranted we will carry it near the material rather than only in correspondence.
Much of what we index is drawn from public records we did not create. We can change how a record is presented on our surfaces, and we can stop presenting it. We cannot amend the underlying government or court record; that has to be sought from the agency or court that published it.
We unpublish rarely, because a public record of what we said is part of being accountable for it. We will consider removal where material is inaccurate and cannot be corrected, where continued publication creates a concrete risk of harm to an identifiable person, or where a provider withdraws our right to use the material. Where we unpublish, we note that we did.
Requests to exercise data-protection rights over personal information are handled under our Privacy Policy and Data Privacy commitments, which run in parallel with this section.
Feedback, complaints, and escalation
We value our readers and users, and feedback is how these standards stay honest. If you have questions, suggestions, or want to collaborate, write to contact@apiautomations.com.
Editorial complaints go to the same address. Tell us what you are complaining about, what standard in this document you believe was not met, and what outcome you are asking for.
If our first response does not resolve it, say so and ask for escalation; the complaint is then reviewed by someone who was not responsible for the material. We will give you a substantive answer rather than a restatement of the first one.
Limits of what we publish
API Automations provides information and data infrastructure services. Nothing we publish is legal, financial, tax, investment, electoral, or professional advice, and nothing we publish is an official communication of any government body.
Our indices and models are analytical tools. They are not consumer reports, and they must not be used as a factor in establishing eligibility for credit, insurance, employment, housing, or any other purpose regulated by the Fair Credit Reporting Act or an equivalent law in another jurisdiction. Licensed use is bound by the terms of the applicable agreement.
For anything carrying a deadline or a legal consequence, verify with the responsible agency, court, or professional adviser before you act.
Changes and contact
We may revise these standards as our products and partnerships change. Material changes are reflected in the "last updated" date at the top of this page.
API Automations operates as API Automations, LLC (United States) and API Automations, LTD (United Kingdom). Editorial questions, corrections, replies, and complaints: contact@apiautomations.com.