Our Policies

• Editorial Standards Page
• Ethics Policy
• Diversity Statement
• Diversity Staffing Report
• Corrections Policy
• Ownership Structure, Funding
• Founding Date
• Masthead
• Mission Statement with Coverage Priorities
• Fact-checking Standards
• Unnamed Sources Policy

---

Editorial Standards Page

The Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism is pleased to be a member of the Trust Project and support efforts to increase transparency and trust in journalism by displaying specially designed Trust Indicators on our stories. We launched the Trust Indicators on Oct. 9, 2018.

The Trust Project is a global network of news organizations that has developed transparency standards to help news readers assess the quality and credibility of journalism. The Trust Indicators are a set of enhancements to participating sites that spell out editorial practices and policies, and provide additional context. On the Center’s site, readers can find the Indicators on the page “About the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism,” and also linked from each new story. To see an example of how links to the Trust Project and the Indicators are displayed within a story, click here.

The core set of Trust Indicators was developed by leaders from 80 news organizations and informed by extensive interviews with readers in the United States and Europe. They describe an organization’s commitment to ethics, inclusive reporting, fact-checking and correcting errors, information on journalists’ backgrounds and how they do their work. In addition, the Indicators denote the type of information that a person is reading — such as news, opinion or analysis.

The Trust Project has helped to standardize the information, structure it for the public to easily find, and make it available for search engines to read.

Every new story published on WisconsinWatch.org features the Trust Project logo and a button that invites the public to read the Center’s policies. In some cases, there will be an additional button that will reveal details about how and why Wisconsin Watch did a report, under a button labeled “Behind the Story.”

Under the policies button, readers can review the Wisconsin Watch’s editorial standards and practices and policies on ethics, diversity, corrections, unnamed sources and fact-checking. Readers will also find links to information about how the Center is staffed and funded and its mission statement: “To increase the quality, quantity and understanding of investigative journalism to foster an informed citizenry and strengthen democracy.”

The “Behind the Story” button will lead to more information about who reported, edited, fact-checked and copy-edited the story, as well as statements in some cases about why the Center pursued the project and how it conducted the investigation. Notices of any corrections will also be posted here.

In incorporating the Trust Indicators, the Center joins more than 120 news sites around the world that are displaying the first digital transparency standard for news that helps people easily recognize the ingredients in trustworthy journalism — much like nutritional labels. Two studies have found that the Trust Indicators help increase readers’ trust in news sites and the journalists who produce the work.  

The Indicators also are embedded in the article and site code — providing the first standardized technical language offering information about participating sites. Partners in the technology sector including Google, Bing, Facebook, Nuzzel, PEN America and NewsGuard will use the Indicators to surface, display or better label journalism on their platforms.

The Trust Project was founded by award-winning journalist Sally Lehrman and is hosted by Santa Clara University’s Markkula Center for Applied Ethics. It is funded by Craig Newmark Philanthropies, Google, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, the Democracy Fund and the Markkula Foundation.

INN Labs, part of the Institute for Nonprofit News, worked with the Center to upgrade its site to add the new tools.

Andy Hall, the Center’s executive director, said news organizations in the Trust Project provide an important defense against online misinformation. The network’s news coverage reaches an estimated 217 million people a month.

“The public needs to be able to determine which news sources to trust as we all seek to understand critical issues in our communities, and potential solutions to problems,” Hall said. “We’re proud to be aboard.”

For more information on the Trust Project, visit TheTrustProject.org.

---

Ethics Policy

The Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism is an independent, nonprofit and nonpartisan news organization that strives to uphold high standards of fairness and accuracy.

The Center’s ethics standards include the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, adopted in 1996 and endorsed by thousands of journalists around the world. That code is reprinted below, with permission. WCIJ’s Board of Directors have also adopted a conflict of interest policy and a diversity statement, which appear after the SPJ Code of Ethics.

Additional standards guiding the Center’s operations include:

• The Center’s Policy on Financial Support, which requires that the Center’s news coverage be independent of donors and that all providers of revenue will be publicly identified.
• Membership standards of the Institute for Nonprofit News (originally Investigative News Network), the nation’s first consortium of nonprofit investigative news organizations. The Center is a founding member of INN and the standards, developed with assistance of the Center’s leaders, require members to disclose information about donors and financial practices, produce nonpartisan investigative journalism, and apply high journalistic standards for accuracy and fairness.

Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics

Preamble
Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist’s credibility. Members of the Society share a dedication to ethical behavior and adopt this code to declare the Society’s principles and standards of practice.

Seek Truth and Report It
Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.
Journalists should:

• Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.
• Diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing.
• Identify sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources’ reliability.
• Always question sources’ motives before promising anonymity. Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.
• Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
• Never distort the content of news photos or video. Image enhancement for technical clarity is always permissible. Label montages and photo illustrations.
• Avoid misleading re-enactments or staged news events. If re-enactment is necessary to tell a story, label it.
• Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information except when traditional open methods will not yield information vital to the public. Use of such methods should be explained as part of the story.
• Never plagiarize.
• Tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience boldly, even when it is unpopular to do so.
• Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others.
• Avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance or social status.
• Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.
• Give voice to the voiceless; official and unofficial sources of information can be equally valid.
• Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.
• Distinguish news from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.
• Recognize a special obligation to ensure that the public’s business is conducted in the open and that government records are open to inspection.

Minimize Harm
Ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect.
Journalists should:

• Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
• Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
• Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of the news is not a license for arrogance.
• Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.
• Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
• Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects or victims of sex crimes.
• Be judicious about naming criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.
• Balance a criminal suspect’s fair trial rights with the public’s right to be informed.

Act Independently
Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public’s right to know.

Journalists should:

• Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
• Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
• Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.
• Disclose unavoidable conflicts.
• Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable.
• Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence news coverage.
• Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; avoid bidding for news.

Be Accountable
Journalists are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other.

Journalists should:

• Clarify and explain news coverage and invite dialogue with the public over journalistic conduct.
• Encourage the public to voice grievances against the news media.
• Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
• Expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media.
• Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.

More information about SPJ and its Code of Ethics is available at www.spj.org.

Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism Conflict of Interest Policy

The following Financial Conflict of Interest Policy (“Conflict of Interest Policy”) is an effort (i) to ensure that the deliberations and decisions of the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism (“WCIJ”) are made solely in the interest of promoting the quality of journalism in the state of Wisconsin, and (ii) to protect the interests of WCIJ when it considers any transaction, contract, or arrangement that might benefit or be perceived to benefit the private interest of a person affiliated with WCIJ (each, a “WCIJ Representative”). As used in this Conflict of Interest Policy, a WCIJ Representative includes any director, advisory board member, financial advisor, legal counsel or employee.

1. Duty to WCIJ. Each WCIJ Representative owes a duty to WCIJ to advance WCIJ’s legitimate interests when the opportunity to do so arises. Each WCIJ Representative must give undivided allegiance when making decisions affecting the organization. Similarly, WCIJ Representatives must be faithful to WCIJ’s non-profit mission and are not permitted to act in a way that is inconsistent with the central goals of the organization and its non-profit status.
2. Gifts. No WCIJ Representative shall personally accept gifts or favors that could compromise his or her loyalty to WCIJ. Any gifts or benefits personally accepted from a party having a material interest in the outcome of WCIJ or its employees by a WCIJ Representative individually should be merely incidental to his or her role as a WCIJ Representative and should not be of substantial value. Any gift with a value of $250 or more, or any gifts with a cumulative value in excess of $250 received by a WCIJ Representative in any twelve-month period from a single source, shall be considered substantial. Cash payments may not be accepted, and no gifts should be accepted if there are strings attached. For example, no WCIJ Representative may accept gifts if he or she knows that such gifts are being given to solicit his or her support of or opposition to the outcome or content of any WCIJ publication.
3. Personal Loans. WCIJ may not loan to, or guarantee the personal obligations of any WCIJ Representative.
4. Conflicts of Interest. The following are examples of conflicts of interest which must be promptly disclosed to the WCIJ Board of Directors pursuant to Section 4 below by any WCIJ Representative with knowledge of such conflict of interest:
   • (a) any real or apparent conflict of interest between a donor or the subject of a WCIJ publication or report and a WCIJ Representative;
   • (b) a WCIJ Representative’s ownership of an equity interest in a person or entity that is or will be the subject of a WCIJ publication or report; and
   • (c) failure to disclose to WCIJ all relationships between the subject of any WCIJ publication or report and any WCIJ Representative or close relatives of the WCIJ Representative.
5. Conflict Procedure:

(a) If a WCIJ Representative or party related to a WCIJ Representative has an interest in any contract, action or transaction to be entered into with WCIJ, a conflict of interest or potential conflict of interest exists. Any WCIJ Representative having knowledge that such a conflict of interest exists or may exist (an “Interested WCIJ Representative”) will so advise the Board of Directors promptly. An Interested WCIJ Representative will include in the notice the material facts as to the relationship or interest of the Interested WCIJ Representative in the entity proposing to enter into a contract, action or transaction with WCIJ.
(b) Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the Board of Directors may authorize any committee appointed pursuant to the WCIJ by-laws (a “Committee”) to act in lieu of the Board of Directors in determining whether an action, contract or transaction is fair to WCIJ as of the time it is authorized or approved by the Committee.
(c) At any time that a conflict of interest or potential conflict of interest is identified, the Chair of the Board or a Chair of the applicable Committee will ensure that such conflict of interest is placed on the agenda for the next meeting of the Board of Directors or the Committee, as applicable. The notice of such meeting of the Board of Directors or the Committee, as applicable, will include, to the extent available when the notice is sent, a description of the conflict of interest matter to be discussed. By notice before the meeting or at the meeting, the directors on the board or the Committee, as applicable, will be advised that a vote will be taken at the meeting and that, in order to authorize the relevant contract, action or transaction, an affirmative vote of a majority of disinterested directors present at the meeting at which a quorum is present will be required and will be sufficient, even though the disinterested directors constitute less than a quorum of the Board of Directors or the Committee.
(d) Reasonable effort will be made to cause the material facts concerning the relationships between the individuals and WCIJ which create the conflict to be delivered to and shared with the members of the Board of Directors or the Committee, as applicable, prior to the meeting to enable the directors to arrive at the meeting prepared to discuss the issue. In the event it is not practicable to deliver the information prior to the meeting, it will be delivered to the directors at the meeting, and the directors can act upon the matter with the same authority as if notice had been given prior to the meeting.
(e) The Board of Directors or the Committee, as applicable, will invite all parties to the conflict of interest to attend the meeting, to make presentations and to be prepared to answer questions, if necessary. The Board or Directors or the Committee, as applicable, will also invite outside experts if necessary.
(f) At the meeting, providing a quorum is present, the conflict will be discussed to ensure that the directors present are aware of the issues and the factors involved. The interested directors may be counted for purposes of a quorum, even though they may not take part in any vote on the issues.
(g) The Board of Directors or the Committee, as applicable, must decide, in good faith, reasonably justified by the material facts, whether the action, contract or transaction would be in the best interest of WCIJ and fair to WCIJ as of the time it is authorized or approved.
(h) All interested directors must abstain from voting and, if necessary, leave the room when the vote is taken.
(i) The Board of Directors or the Committee, as applicable, will maintain a written account of all that transpires at the meeting and incorporate such account into the minutes of the meeting and disseminate it to the full Board of Directors. Such minutes will be presented for approval at the next meeting of the Board of Directors and maintained in the corporate record book.
(j) To the extent that the conflict of interest is continuing and the contract, action or transaction goes beyond one (1) year, the foregoing notice and discussion and vote will be repeated on an annual basis.

---

Diversity Statement

The Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism embraces diversity and inclusiveness in its journalism, training activities, hiring practices and workplace operations. The Center recognizes that its mission and society in general are strengthened by respecting individuals’ cultural traditions, beliefs and viewpoints. The Center further acknowledges that for its journalism, and our democracy, to attain their highest potential, a robust supply of reliable information about key issues must be accessible to all.

Inclusiveness is at the heart of thinking and acting as journalists. Our guiding principles: Protect the vulnerable. Expose wrongdoing. Explore solutions. The complex issues we face as a society require respect for different viewpoints. Race, class, generation, gender and geography all affect point of view. Reflecting these differences in our reporting leads to better, more-nuanced stories and a better-informed community.

Part of our commitment to diversity means being transparent about our own staff. Our latest demographic survey data may be found here. Information about the composition of the Center’s workforce in past years may be found in its responses to the American Society of News Editors Newsroom Employment Diversity Survey from 2017 and 2018. ASNE, now the News Leaders Association, paused data collection in 2020 to redesign the survey.

The Center recognizes that Wisconsin law bars employers from discrimination on the basis of:

Age, Ancestry, Arrest Record, Color, Conviction Record, Creed, Disability, Genetic Testing, Honesty Testing, Marital Status, Military Service, National Origin, Pregnancy or Childbirth, Race, Sex, Sexual Orientation, Use or nonuse of lawful products off the employer’s premises during nonworking hours. Employees may not be harassed in the workplace based on their protected status nor retaliated against for filing a complaint, for assisting with a complaint, or for opposing discrimination in the workplace.

Approved Sept. 8, 2010, updated May 8, 2018, by the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism Board of Directors

Our anti-racism stand and a pledge of action

On August 5, 2020, we published a statement representing the views of the entire Wisconsin Watch staff, including a pledge of action developed through weeks of discussion, research and reflection. The statement includes the following commitment. 

We pledge to:

 — Investigate and expose the histories and disparate impacts of systems on the lives of people of color. 

— Explore solutions to problems not just through the perspectives of experts traditionally sought out by journalists, but also through the lived experiences of people who are finding ways to navigate existing societal systems.

— Embrace anti-racism, diversity, equity and inclusiveness in all of our journalism, and in our own newsroom, including collaborative efforts, the framing of news coverage and selection of news sources, plus in our training activities, hiring and retention practices, and workplace operations. 

— Listen to your story ideas and welcome your contributions to our opinion and letters to the editors pages as forums for all voices.

Read the full statement and pledge of action here.

Related content:

Our DEI Board Task Force and Staff Committee

Staff demographics

Wisconsin Watch is now capitalizing the ‘B’ in Black. Here’s why.

---

Diversity Staffing Report

Related content:
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion at the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism

DEI Board Task Force and Staff Committee

Our anti-racism stand and a pledge of action

Wisconsin Watch is now capitalizing the ‘B’ in Black. Here’s why.

Demographic breakdown by gender and race

Jan. 13, 2021

---

---

Corrections Policy

Mistakes happen.

We’ve developed fact-checking protocols here at the Center. But when an error slips by us, the best thing we can do to keep our readers’ trust is own up to it.

Our policy is to correct stories promptly and openly. If we find an error, we will fix the story and note on the page what has been corrected.

As most news outlets do, we distinguish between corrections (for mistakes) and clarifications (for vague or misleading content).

If you think we’ve made a mistake in a story, tell us!

---

Ownership Structure, Funding

The Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism is an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan 501(c)(3) organization that is primarily funded through grants from foundations and donations from individuals and corporations. Additional revenue is obtained through sponsorships of its events and activities, and from earned income — payments for providing services such as fact-checking, collaborating with students or producing investigative journalism projects.

More than 850 individuals, foundations, news organizations and other groups have contributed financially to the Center since its launch in 2009.

As a matter of policy, funders exercise no control over the Center’s editorial decisions, and all funders are publicly identified.

The Center’s first major grant, a gift of $100,000 in general support, was awarded by the Ethics and Excellence in Journalism Foundation in 2009.

The Oklahoma-based foundation continued to support the Center with grants of $100,000 in 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015; $75,000 in 2016; $50,000 in 2017 and 2018.

In 2010, the Center received a two-year $75,000 matching grant from Challenge Fund for Journalism VI, a joint program of the Ford Foundation in New York, the McCormick Foundation in Illinois and the Ethics and Excellence in Journalism Foundation. The Center successfully completed a campaign to raise those matching funds in 2011.

The Foundation to Promote Open Society, which works in cooperation with the Open Society Foundations in New York City, awarded the Center general support totaling $50,000 in 2009, $100,000 in 2010 (to be spread over two years), $35,000 in 2011, $350,000 in 2012 (to be spread over two years), $350,000 in 2014 (over two years) and $200,000 in 2016.

In 2011, the Center announced a partnership with MAPLight.org to investigate the influence of money in Wisconsin state politics and policymaking. The project was supported by the Open Society Institute. The Center received about $25,000 for this project in 2011 and a similar amount in the first half of 2012.

In 2013, The Joyce Foundation became a major supporter of the Center. The Chicago-based foundation awarded a $100,000 grant that was split by the Center and MinnPost, a nonprofit news organization, to support in-depth coverage of key issues in Wisconsin and Minnesota. The grant funded coverage of political reform, environmental protection and gun violence issues in Wisconsin, as well as political reform in Minnesota. In 2014, Joyce awarded the Center $50,000 to support coverage of democracy, the environment and gun violence prevention. That was followed by a two-year grant in 2016, awarding $50,000 annually to support coverage of democracy, the environment and gun violence prevention. In 2018, The Joyce Foundation awarded the Center a two-year grant of $100,000 a year. In 2020, the foundation awarded the Center a two-year general support grant of $150,000 a year.

The Evjue Foundation, the charitable arm of The Capital Times in Madison, is a major supporter of the Center. The foundation made contributions to WCIJ in 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012, and in 2013, significantly increased its support to $20,000 — the largest single contribution received from a Wisconsin donor. Evjue repeated its $20,000 support in 2014 and 2015, and increased its giving to $30,000 in 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019. It contributed $10,000 in 2020.

The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, based in Miami, became a major donor in 2014 with a $75,000 general operating grant (spread over two years). In December 2016, the foundation designated the Center as one of 57 nonprofit news organizations eligible for up to $25,000 in matching funds through its NewsMatch program. As 2017 began, the Center successfully completed the match, thanks to 168 donors.

At the end of 2017, the Center was awarded $28,000 from NewsMatch, now funded by an expanded number of donors, for meeting the program’s fundraising goals, and in 2018, the Center was awarded $27,000 from NewsMatch. The Center successfully attained its 2019 NewsMatch goal and also was selected to receive an additional $10,000 from REI Co-op.

In 2014, the Center and UW-Madison journalism school obtained a $35,000 grant that was among the inaugural awards at 12 universities under the Challenge Fund for Innovation in Journalism Education, created to encourage experimentation in ways to provide news and information. The competitive program was managed by the Online News Association and funded by the Excellence and Ethics in Journalism Foundation, the Robert R. McCormick Foundation, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, the Democracy Fund and the Rita Allen Foundation.

In 2015, the Vital Projects Fund, based in New York City, became a major supporter, contributing $25,000 to support the Center’s coverage of criminal justice issues. It provided $20,000 in 2016, $15,000 in 2017 and $20,000 in 2019.

The Reva & David Logan Foundation, based in Chicago, became a major supporter of the Center in 2017 with a general support grant of $100,000. The foundation awarded the Center $125,000 grants in 2018 and 2019. In 2020, the foundation awarded the Center a three-year grant of $150,000 a year.

The Center also is grateful for support it received from the Peters Family Foundation in Utah in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019; the Wisconsin State Journal in 2009, 2012, 2013 and 2014; and the Wisconsin Newspaper Association and its related foundation, which provided $10,000 in 2014 and 2015, $14,000 in 2016, $20,000 in 2017, and $5,000 in 2019 and 2020.

In 2016, the University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Journalism and Mass Communication received a grant from the Ira and Ineva Reilly Baldwin Wisconsin Idea Endowment to establish a class in fact-checking and to create The Observatory website to publish fact-checked reports and information about fact-checking. The Center, in turn, received a contract of $15,000 in the first year and $10,000 in the second to develop and launch the website and assist in fact-checking, editing and distribution of content. The Center is training students and raising the supply of high-quality verified journalism.

In 2017, the School of Journalism and Mass Communication received a three-year grant totaling $120,000 from the Ira and Ineva Reilly Baldwin Wisconsin Idea Endowment to collaborate with the Center on production of investigative reports by students that are published on the Center’s website and distributed to media partners across the state and nation. The Center was paid through a contract.

In 2019, Houston philanthropists Laura and John Arnold, founders of Arnold Ventures, became major supporters of the Center, with a $100,000 gift of general operating support. They also provided a gift of $100,000 in 2020.

In 2019, the Lau and Bea Christensen Charitable Foundation donated $10,000 to support the Center.

In 2019, Mary and Ken Rouse donated $50,000 to the Center from the estate of their friend, Roger “Whitey” Bruesewitz.

In 2019, Susan Troller Cosgrove and her husband, Howard Cosgrove, established a fund in memory of her mother, Dorothy Mae Johnson Troller, a 1949 UW-Madison journalism graduate, to support the work of journalism students at the Center. They are contributing $10,000 a year in the first phase of the fund.

In 2019, the Wm. Collins Kohler Foundation awarded the Center a gift of $35,000 a year for three years to support fact-checking and other efforts to strengthen the integrity of journalism.

LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman became a major supporter of the Center in 2019 with a $100,000 gift of general operating support.

Members of the Center’s Board of Directors, who serve as volunteers, are financial supporters of the organization.

The Center has received revenue for producing reports and conducting interviews through arrangements with the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit investigative news organization in Washington, D.C.; WBEZ Public Media in Chicago; American University’s J-Lab: The Institute for Interactive Journalism; Reveal from the Center for Investigative Reporting; Sarah Colt Productions in New York City; HuffPost; and NPR.

In 2017, the Center launched the Watchdog Club to enrich members’ experience with investigative journalism, and to involve these loyal members in efforts to transform the Center into a larger, more financially resilient organization. These members donate $1,000 or more a year per household.

In 2019, the Center created the Leadership Circle, a group of Watchdog Club members taking a leadership role in sustaining investigative reporting and the training of investigative journalists. These members donated $5,000 or more in 2019:

Laura and John Arnold
Mary Burke
Lau and Bea Christensen Charitable Foundation
Susan Troller Cosgrove and Howard Cosgrove
Evjue Foundation
Wendy Fearnside and Bruce Meier
Andy and Dee J. Hall
Larry Hands and Karen Kendrick-Hands
Phil and Tricia Hands
Sally Mead Hands Foundation
Reid Hoffman
Barbara Johnson
Wm. Collins Kohler Foundation
Reva and David Logan Foundation
David and Marion Meissner
Peters Family Foundation
Mary and Ken Rouse

In 2019 and 2020, the Center received subsidies (50% in year one, 33% in year two) to support the salary of a Report for America journalist who is producing an investigative podcast on police and prosecutorial misconduct in Wisconsin. 

In 2019 and 2020, the Center received a total of $234,000 from the Google News Initiative to support the launch of News414, a collaborative project of the Center, Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service and Outlier Media. News414 engages residents of underserved Milwaukee neighborhoods, responds to information requests via text message, investigates residents’ most pressing needs and delivers accountability journalism.

In 2019 and 2020, the Center received $100,000 grants from the Facebook Membership Accelerator, to support its development of a membership program and improvements to its digital infrastructure. The Lenfest Institute collaborated in the grantmaking.

In 2020, the Center received $8,500 from the Walton Family Foundation for its role in a collaborative reporting project on rural education during the pandemic. Six other newsrooms participated in the project, with assistance from the Institute for Nonprofit News.

In 2020, the Center received separate $5,000 payments from the Google News Initiative and the Facebook Journalism Project to support its reporting on the pandemic.

In 2020, the Center received a $93,581 forgivable loan under the federal Paycheck Protection Program to support its operations through the economic uncertainty caused by the pandemic. 

In 2020, the Center received $20,000 from First Draft to support the work of Howard Hardee, one of First Draft’s fellows reporting on misinformation and disinformation in the 2020 election. 

In 2020, Craig Newmark Philanthropies provided a $70,000 grant to the Center for its role in the Election Integrity Project to safeguard the voices of voters. The Center collaborated with the UW-Madison Center for Journalism Ethics, which also received grant money, to produce tools for the public and journalists to discern what’s credible, and what’s not.

In 2020, ProPublica’s Electionland project provided a 25% subsidy of a Center reporter’s salary to support coverage of voting issues.

In 2020, the Center received $51,000 from Votebeat, a nonprofit newsroom covering local election administration and voting in eight states, created by Chalkbeat. The Center works with two reporters and an editor on stories focusing on Wisconsin elections and voting.

Our financial supporters

(Updated November 2020) 

---

Founding Date

2009-01-19

---

Masthead

We are proud of our team of senior staff, staff and fellows, contributors, interns and consultants, who work together to make Wisconsin Watch strong. Click on the team member’s name to learn more about them.

Part of our mission at Wisconsin Watch is to train the next generation of journalists and those working in the business of journalism. After team members leave our offices, they move on to jobs in journalism and other fields, where they put the skills they learned at the Center to use by holding the powerful to account, creating innovative ways of engaging with the public, sustaining high-quality journalism, and strengthening our society. We celebrate the successes of our former staff, fellows and interns, who are Wisconsin Watch’s legacy.

Senior Staff

---

Mission Statement with Coverage Priorities

This can be found at this link.

---

Fact-checking Standards

At the nonprofit and nonpartisan Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, accuracy is something we think about all the time. An integral step in our process happens after a reporter finishes a story but before the story reaches our readers’ eyes: fact-checking.

Every report we produce goes through a rigorous review. Managing Editor Dee J. Hall, or another fact-checker, typically spends between eight and 12 hours with the reporter verifying each and every word. Tack on the time it takes to vet multimedia elements, and we spend at least two full days scrutinizing each major package we distribute.

We believe it is time well spent.

“We’re in the information and fact business,” Hall said. “It is up to individual news editors to choose to run our stories, and they have to be able to trust us.”

Because even a minor fact error like a misspelled name could undermine the Center’s credibility, we take every measure we can to report with accuracy.

For each individual fact — a name or age, a report’s title, a summary of events, a quote or even an impression — the reporter must produce evidence of it from a reliable source. On a printed copy of the story, the fact-checker numbers the fact, while the reporter shows and marks its supporting evidence, which is also printed.

It is a version of a system graciously shared in 2009 by our colleagues at the nonprofit Center for Public Integrity — one we adopted to improve the accuracy of our journalism after two of our earliest reports contained mistakes.

Every fact-check reveals the need for additional editing to enhance clarity. Hall and the reporter also consider whether a story covers a topic fully and fairly.

“There are times during the fact-checking process where you identify gaps in the reporting,” Hall said. “Let’s say a fact you thought was correct is actually off, what else does that mean?”

It is not unusual for a reporter to be sent to do additional reporting after the first review.

In the end, every story has a thick paper file of fact-checking materials which can be easily referenced and reviewed.

Future journalists trained in fact-checking

In addition to producing high-quality journalism, another key part of our mission is training current and future journalists. We aim to instill our obsession with accuracy in them, too.

In 2016 we began working with The Observatory, a student fact-checking outlet founded by Michael Wagner and Lucas Graves, faculty at the University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Journalism and Mass Communication. We assist in fact-checking every story The Observatory publishes.

This page was excerpted from a longer article by Center reporter Cara Lombardo: We take facts seriously at the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism. Here’s why.

---

Unnamed Sources Policy

Adopted May 8, 2018, by the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism Board of Directors

The Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism’s newsroom guidelines on use of unnamed sources are based on the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, approved in 1996, and adopted in full by the Center in 2009; and guidelines publicly shared by The New York Times in July 2016.

The Center’s guidelines on use of unnamed sources:

— Identify sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources’ reliability.

— Always question sources’ motives before promising anonymity. Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.

— Any use of anonymous sourcing must be specifically approved by a top editor such as the managing editor or executive director.

— Direct quotes from anonymous sources should be used rarely, and only when such quotes are pivotal to the story.

— At least one editor must know the specific identity of any anonymous source. This in no way reflects a lack of trust between editor and reporter; it’s just a regular part of our diligence in this sensitive area. The reporter should routinely offer this information, or the story editor should ask.

---

Article Post Types

post