Editorial Standards

Blockchain Academics is an independent crypto news, research, and education platform. We hold ourselves to the standards of professional journalism: accurate, sourced, fairly presented, and corrected publicly when wrong.

We cover what matters in crypto for a global audience — protocol news, markets, regulation, security, on-chain analysis, and long-format research — without the cheerleading and without the sponsorship-disguised-as-coverage that defines much of the industry press.

Every article on Blockchain Academics passes a four-stage review:

1. Writer — reports, sources, drafts. Checks facts against primary documents (filings, on-chain data, official statements) before submitting.
2. Assigning Editor — reviews framing, sourcing adequacy, and headline. Confirms the angle is supported by the evidence in hand.
3. Fact-Check — independent verification of every claim and quote. Numbers re-run from source. Articles that pass display the “Fact-checked” flag.
4. Final Review — copy edit, style, links, metadata, and disclosure check. Editor of record signs off.

Both writer and editor of record are credited on every article. Read the names — that’s who is accountable for what you read.

We prefer named, on-the-record sources. We also use four other categories of source, each with explicit rules:

• On the record — the source’s name and affiliation are usable. Default for all interviews.
• On background — usable but not for direct attribution. Identified by role only (e.g. “a senior compliance officer at the firm”).
• Off the record — not publishable. Used to inform our reporting, never to write copy from.
• Anonymous source — used only when (a) the information is genuinely newsworthy, (b) on-the-record alternatives were exhausted, and (c) the source faces a documented risk of retaliation, prosecution, or job loss. Approved by a senior editor, not the writer alone.

Documents shared with us are verified independently before publication.

We use AI tools internally for research, transcription, and draft assistance. Whenever AI materially contributed to drafting an article, the article carries an “AI assistance disclosed” note in its footer.

AI output is never published unedited. A human editor reviews, fact-checks, and revises every line. AI does not appear in the byline — the human who took the reporting and editorial decisions does.

Every editorial team member declares any personal holding of a crypto asset worth more than US$1,000 on their public author profile. Holdings declarations are refreshed every quarter and at any time a writer covers an asset they hold. The “last refreshed” date is shown publicly on each author profile.

A writer with a material position in an asset does not write stand-alone news on that asset without an editor’s explicit approval and an in-article disclosure. Research and opinion pieces always carry an in-article disclosure where relevant. Authors with a permanent conflict on an asset or company list it under Does Not Cover on their author profile and recuse fully.

Trading rules. Editorial team members commit to:

• 30-day minimum hold on any crypto asset purchased, from purchase date.
• No shorts, no perpetual futures, no leveraged products on any crypto asset, by anyone on the editorial team.
• No trading during working hours, defined as the 8-hour block after a writer’s daily byline goes live, or between 09:00–17:00 in the writer’s home timezone if no byline that day.
• Stocks are more restrictive than crypto. Editorial team members do not hold individual equity in any company they cover or could foreseeably cover (exchanges, custody providers, mining cos, listed crypto companies). Broad-market ETFs are fine.
• No participation in protocol launches they cover (airdrops, points farming, IDO/ICO buy-ins, retroactive grant programs) until at least 12 months have passed since their most recent coverage of that protocol.

These rules are stricter than the SPJ baseline and roughly equivalent to the policies of CoinDesk, The Block, and Decrypt. They exist because crypto financialises the things we report on faster than any previous beat — the discipline has to match.

When we get something wrong, we say so visibly, in the article and on our public corrections page. Each correction includes the date, what was wrong, and what the correct information is.

We do not silently edit articles. Substantive changes after publication are timestamped under the byline. Trivial fixes (typos, broken links) are made without note.

We honour embargoes accepted in good faith. We refuse embargoes that are attached to material we have not yet agreed to receive. Once an embargo is broken — including by the source — it is no longer in force.

Any plagiarism — from another outlet, from a research note, or from AI output passed off as original — results in retraction of the article and termination of the writer’s relationship with Blockchain Academics. We credit other reporters and outlets when our coverage builds on theirs.

Blockchain Academics is part of a broader group of crypto companies including BCA Studio (an agency working with crypto projects), DEXTools, and DEXT Force Ventures. Editorial team members do not cover client companies of BCA Studio. Investments held by DEXT Force are disclosed at financial-disclosures and disclosed in any article touching a portfolio company.

Editorial decisions are made by the editorial team and not by sales, partnerships, or any non-editorial function. Sponsored content is clearly labelled as such and is not produced by the editorial team.