Introduction
Ever since its court registration, Renewable Matter has always strictly adhered to the current code of ethics of the Italian Order of Journalists, summarised in the Consolidated Text on the Duties of Journalists. The code set out below is based on this document and on traditional ethical charters, reaffirming the commitment of Renewable Matter’s journalists to practise their profession in a fair and transparent manner.
Our mission and objectives
Renewable Matter firmly believes in the fundamental value of information. Citizens who have access to clear, reliable and verified news, who are enriched by the exchange of ideas and opinions, live in a country that is truly freer, more democratic and more sustainable. This is why we aim to provide high-quality, responsible, impartial, comprehensive, accurate and correct information that is accessible to all. We seek to publish clear analyses, in-depth investigations, well-founded critiques and thought-provoking opinions on topics such as the circular economy, economic development, innovation, design and best practice. We aim to make sense of the flow of information, empowering readers to learn and understand so that they can form their own judgements.
Gender, social and ethnic diversity
Inclusivity is at the heart of the editorial team’s thinking and actions. Respect for different perspectives is essential to tackling the complex situations we face. Reflecting differences – of class, gender and background – in our work enables us to produce better and more balanced stories. At the same time, we believe in a diverse and balanced workforce, where women make up the majority of our staff, and journalists from all over the world are encouraged to write in English for our publication.
Fairness
Renewable Matter is committed to rectifying any errors or inaccuracies in its articles as quickly as possible. On the website, corrections will be indicated at the bottom of the article. In the print edition, requests for clarification will be published in designated boxes. Requests may be sent to redazione@renewablematter.eu
Verification of sources
The editorial team is committed to achieving the highest standards of accuracy, obtained by the article’s author and the editors-in-chief who oversee the work, by verifying facts and sources (which must, as a rule, be cited), by using more than one source unless impossible, by making a clear and explicit distinction between primary and secondary sources, and by avoiding exaggeration and sensationalism.
Anonymous sources
The use of anonymous sources is the exception, not the rule, and must be justified in every case: the legitimate protection of a source and professional confidentiality are irreplaceable safeguards for every journalist, in accordance with Italian law. We encourage you to read our dedicated document in English for all whistleblowers and anonymous sources.
Content is classified according to a series of categories traditionally used:
Report: Content based on facts, either observed and verified directly by the reporter or sourced from verified and reliable channels. It may include multiple perspectives on a particular topic, unlike press releases or propaganda. A report never presents the author’s opinion. This category includes narrative content, often referred to as “features”, provided that it is entirely based on facts. Should a report also contain an analytical section, the dual category – report and analysis – must be explicitly stated.
News: Journalistic content that does not fall into any of the other categories defined by the Trust Project. We classify as news content that may be sourced from press agencies, tables containing market data, editorials or articles that cannot be described as commentary. We also include content published in the past, prior to joining the Trust Project, where publishers are unable to update their archives.
Editorial: Opinion-based content that sets out the background to a story and offers an interpretation of the elements characterising a particular topic. It puts forward ideas and draws conclusions based on the author’s interpretation of facts and data. It conveys to the public the author’s views on the event or issue. Commentaries may include facts or quotations, but they nevertheless reflect the author’s opinions, personal preferences and conclusions.
Analysis: Based on national or international news stories, the analysis draws on the author’s experience and specialist knowledge to explain the facts, at times interpreting them and drawing conclusions for the benefit of readers. It may include predictions of how events might unfold, based on experience. Analysis is based exclusively on factual accounts, although the author uses their expertise on the subject to put the news into context and help the reader understand the event or issue. Analysis adheres to the general guidelines for journalistic reporting. Typically, an analysis follows or accompanies a report on the same subject.
Journalistic ethics
Journalists and contributors to Renewable Matter are required to comply with the Italian journalists’ code of ethics.
How we use artificial intelligence
Renewable Matter’s transparency policy on the use of AI in content creation
As of 2 August 2026, Article 50 of EU Regulation 2024/1689 (the European AI Act) requires content publishers to explicitly state when artificial intelligence has generated or substantially modified what the general public reads, sees or hears. This is our editorial policy.
Our applications of AI
Artificial intelligence is used exclusively as a tool to support research and content creation; authorship and responsibility for the content remain entirely human. In practical terms, in some cases AI can help us to:
- navigate complex topics and quickly identify and compare reference sources;
- analyse documents and data in compliance with data protection and press regulations;
- transcribe audio material;
- translate texts to and from English;
- suggest options for presenting data;
- propose alternative headlines and adjustments to existing content for different publication channels.
In each of these cases, the AI output would serve only as a starting point. We never publish any text, data or images generated by artificial intelligence without first having a member of our editorial team read, verify and approve them in full.
Cases in which the use of AI is excluded
- We do not invent or reconstruct quotes using artificial intelligence. If you read a sentence in quotation marks in one of our articles, the persons quoted ctually said or wrote it directly to a journalist on our editorial team, or it is a quote from another publication – which we duly name and link to – that we have verified against the primary source.
- We do not alter the direct quotes of interviewees. Even when we restructure an interview during the editing process, we stay true to the words actually spoken; or, should corrections or amendments be necessary, these are always carried out with the interviewee’s authorisation.
- We do not use AI as a source of data or facts. Verification against a primary, verifiable source (for example, public administrations and bodies, independent authorities, European Union institutions and agencies, official statistical authorities, recognised press agencies and official corporate documents) always remains the foundation of our work.
- We do not create or disseminate realistic images, audio or video depicting events that have never taken place or non-existent situations. Any AI-generated synthetic content is used solely in explicitly experimental or illustrative contexts to demonstrate how AI interprets or visualises a phenomenon, in accordance with transparency requirements. Under no circumstances do we use deepfakes or multimedia content designed to mislead the public about the reality of events.
When the use of AI must be made explicit
If an artificial intelligence generates content that we publish – whether journalistic or not – we state this clearly and prominently. We always indicate this for:
- images generated or substantially altered using AI;
- synthetic audio or voices;
- reconstructed or synthetic videos and graphics, for example on social media;
- translations, even those fully reviewed by an editor.
Who is accountable for what we publish
Always a person, never a tool. Every article supported by artificial intelligence is credited to a journalist who takes full responsibility for it, just as with any of our other content. AI may have contributed to the research, transcription or translation: editorial responsibility – factual accuracy, the integrity of sources, and respect for those interviewed – remains entirely ours.
Human review
No AI-generated content is published without being thoroughly reviewed by a human. Every quote, name, date, figure and link that the AI has helped us gather is always checked against the primary source before going online.
How to report an error to us
If you spot an inaccuracy, a missing disclosure where you think there should be one, or have any other queries, please email redazione@renewablematter.eu. Every valid report will result in a correction to the article and, if the error is significant, a correction note will be displayed at the bottom of the piece.
Contacts
Reports and feedback can be sent to redazione@renewablematter.eu
Signed by the Management
Management
Editor-in-Chief: Emanuele Bompan
Chief Editor: Giorgia Marino