Editorial trust
Editorial Policy
This policy explains how Radikal Rasional treats articles, analysis, evidence, conflicts, corrections, and editorial review during beta.
Editorial independence
Editorial decisions are guided by public relevance, evidence, democratic accountability, and intellectual seriousness. Contributors and funders do not receive automatic publication.
Contributor review process
Articles move through draft, review, changes requested, approved, scheduled, published, and archived states. Editors may request revision before publication.
Evidence expectations
Analysis should name sources, lived observation, policy documents, data, or clear reasoning. Unsupported claims may be revised or rejected.
Opinion and analysis
Opinion is welcome when it is transparent about argument and values. Analysis should distinguish facts, interpretation, and proposal.
Corrections
Material errors should be corrected with editorial traceability. Published content may be updated, archived, or clarified.
Conflicts of interest
Authors and reviewers should disclose relevant institutional, political, financial, or advocacy relationships when they materially affect interpretation.