Technology & Editorial Transparency
Effective date: June 2026
ESG Broadcast uses technology assistance in parts of its content production process. This page explains what that means in practice, what it does not mean, and how human editorial responsibility is maintained at every stage. We publish this because transparency about how journalism is produced is a professional obligation.
The human editorial layer — what never changes
Every article published on ESG Broadcast is approved by a human editor before it reaches the reader. This is not a formality. The human editor:
- selects which regulatory development, filing, or milestone is worth covering
- verifies the primary source document and confirms the facts it contains
- reviews and edits any draft for accuracy, tone, relevance, and compliance with our Editorial Policy
- makes the final decision to publish, hold, or reject
No content is published automatically. No draft bypasses the human editorial layer. If a story cannot be supported by a verifiable primary source, it does not get published — regardless of how it was drafted.
Where technology assistance is used
Our editorial team uses a technology-assisted drafting tool to produce structured first drafts from verified public sources — regulatory circulars, exchange filings, standards body updates, company disclosures. The tool produces a draft; the editor assesses, rewrites where necessary, and approves. The tool does not decide what to cover, does not verify sources independently, and does not make editorial judgements.
For ESG milestone submissions, an automated source check fetches the URL provided by the submitting company and flags whether the company name appears in relation to the claimed milestone. This is a first-pass screening step. A human editor reviews the result and the source URL directly before any decision is made. The source check does not determine the outcome — the editor does.
Disclosure on articles
Articles produced with technology drafting assistance carry a note at the bottom of the piece: "This brief was drafted with editorial tool assistance and reviewed by the ESG Broadcast editorial team." Articles written entirely by a named human contributor carry the contributor's name and designation and do not carry this note.
What the technology does not do
The drafting tool does not assess whether a company's ESG performance is good or bad. It does not produce ESG ratings, scores, or rankings. It does not have access to non-public information. All source material used is publicly available. It does not determine coverage decisions — those remain with the human editorial team.
Why we work this way
The ESG regulatory and standards landscape in India generates a significant volume of material — SEBI circulars, MCA notifications, RBI directions, BRSR filings, international standards updates — that a small editorial team cannot cover at the required speed without structural support. Technology assistance handles drafting structure and speed. Human editorial judgement handles accuracy, relevance, and responsibility. The two are not interchangeable.
Data handled in the process
Source material submitted to the drafting tool consists of publicly available documents. Subscriber personal data is never submitted to it. Submission contact details are never submitted to it. For verification purposes, URLs provided in ESG milestone submissions are fetched by our editorial system. This is disclosed in our Privacy Policy.
Affiliated platform disclosures
ESG Broadcast's technology partner, InCircularity Systems, operates GOVERNiC, BFSIdecarb, WhizzX, and the InC ESG Protocol; JointValues ESG Services Pvt. Ltd. is our knowledge partner. Where ESG Broadcast publishes content that references data produced by these platforms, the source is identified. Coverage of Indian ESG regulation is comprehensive and includes regulation relevant to these platforms' markets — this is incidental to editorial scope, not commercial direction.
ESG Broadcast does not publish promotional content for affiliated platforms without identifying it as such.
Feedback
If you believe a published piece contains a factual error that may relate to how it was produced, or if you have concerns about our editorial process, write to [email protected] with the subject line "Editorial Process Feedback." We treat this seriously and use it to improve.