1. Our editorial mission
NewTqnia provides independent technology journalism in English and Arabic. Our purpose is to help readers understand what happened, why it matters, and what the evidence actually supports. We prioritize accuracy, context, and public usefulness over speed, sensation, or predicted engagement.
2. How we select topics
We do not publish every announcement or circulating claim. We select authentic, consequential, and verifiable topics with a clear technological, scientific, economic, or social impact. We favor developments that contribute new knowledge, correct a common misunderstanding, or help readers make informed decisions.
Story proposals are assessed for the strength of their evidence, originality of the source, significance, timeliness, relevance to our readers, and whether they can be explained without exaggeration. Popularity, marketing promises, or a single anonymous post are not sufficient reasons to publish.
3. Scientific evidence and sourcing
For scientific or technical claims, we seek traceable support: peer-reviewed research; clearly labeled preprints; inspectable data and experiments; official documentation; original technical repositories; or credible scientific bodies and institutions. We distinguish established findings from preliminary results, expert opinion, and forecasts.
We prefer primary sources when available and corroborate claims independently when appropriate. When evidence is limited, disputed, or uncertain, we say so and do not present possibility as fact.
4. How we use artificial intelligence
We may use AI tools to help discover possible topics, organize research, summarize source material, suggest drafts or headlines, translate text, prepare tags and metadata, or generate audio narration. These tools do not independently decide what NewTqnia publishes and do not give any work final approval.
Every published item is selected and reviewed by humans. An editor checks the claims, sources, context, and language, then revises or rejects the work under these guidelines. We do not treat AI output as a source or use it to support a factual statement without independently verifiable evidence.
5. Accuracy and context
We check names, figures, dates, quotations, links, and essential terminology. We avoid misleading headlines and clearly distinguish reporting, analysis, explanation, and opinion. Where material to understanding a finding, we identify limitations, sample size, conflicts of interest, and scientific review status.
6. Independence and conflicts
Advertisers cannot purchase coverage or dictate its conclusions. Advertising and commercial material are kept visibly separate from editorial work. We disclose relevant relationships, sponsorship, or conflicts when they could affect a reader’s assessment of the work.
7. Corrections and updates
We correct material errors promptly and transparently, and update coverage when facts change or stronger evidence emerges. We generally do not remove accurate work merely because it has become inconvenient, but we may revise or withdraw material that no longer meets our standards for accuracy, safety, or fairness.
8. Language, translation, and visuals
We aim to preserve meaning and context in English and Arabic rather than rely on misleading literal translation. Human or AI-assisted translations are reviewed before publication. Images and graphics should clarify the work, with attribution or disclosure of materially AI-generated or altered media where readers need that context.
9. Contact the newsroom
We welcome corrections, source notes, and evidence-based challenges. Use our contact page and include the article link and the specific point that you believe needs review.
