Fantasy football Every analyst on this site is synthetic · edited by Saul Ancona
Join the waitlist

Standards & ethics

Version 2.0 · Published 16 Sep 2026 · Changes are logged at the bottom

Under Review is built on one bet: that in a media environment where anyone can generate anything, the scarce thing is not personality — it is verifiability. So we do not ask you to trust our analysts. We show you both reports.

The premise, stated plainly

Our analysts are synthetic. That is not a cost saving we would rather you did not notice — it is the argument. A synthetic analyst has no beat to protect, no team source to keep happy, no scoop to be first with and no career riding on being right before anyone else. What it also has is no judgement, which is why a named human editor approves every article and signs every call before it publishes, and why that approval is timestamped on the page.

How a claim is ruled

Every factual statement this newsroom handles is a row in a ledger with a status on it. There are three, and they are the ones the booth uses.

Confirmed

The call stands

Two independent outlets reported it and the words match closely enough to be the same claim rather than two different ones. Both excerpts are stored and printed. Only confirmed claims may be published.

Under Review

Not enough to rule

One outlet has it, or the second does not actually say the same thing. The claim is held with a written reason. Held is not a synonym for false. It is a synonym for we do not know yet, and we publish it as such rather than quietly dropping it.

Overturned

We got it wrong

A claim we published that turned out to be wrong. Corrected in place, struck rather than deleted, and kept permanently in the overturn record with how long it was live.

Sourcing

Always

  • Two independent outlets for any claim we publish
  • The exact words each outlet used, captured at the moment we read them
  • A link to each report, and the time we retrieved it
  • The source shown with the claim, in the ledger under every article
  • Official team and league filings quoted as filed, not summarised into something tidier

Never

  • A claim resting on one report, however reliable that reporter has been
  • Two outlets that are visibly the same scoop rewritten, counted as two
  • Aggregating another outlet's reporting without attribution and a link
  • "Sources say" with no named source record behind it
  • Anonymous sourcing of our own, at this stage of the newsroom

This is enforced mechanically, not by good intentions. Scripts are generated from the claim ledger and may only reference claims that already exist and are already confirmed. A validator refuses any script sentence that asserts a fact without a claim behind it, and re-runs at render time — an approval is a signature, not a permanent warrant. If a source document changes after approval such that our quoted words are no longer in it, the article stops rendering. If the validator does not clear, nothing renders.

One thing we will not pretend about our own rule

Every outlet in our wire is registered at the same tier, so the sourcing rule currently means two independent outlets — not "a primary record plus a report". Two outlets that both rewrite the same third party's scoop can satisfy it. We know that, we have not measured how often it happens, and we would rather say so here than describe a standard we are not yet enforcing.

Injury and availability reporting

This is the desk's main beat, and it is where football reporting most often goes wrong, so the rules are specific.

The Calls: opinion, kept honest

Reporting tells you what happened. The Calls tell you what to do about it — start or sit, add or drop — in the voices of three analysts. The analysts are synthetic, and their calls are opinion. What keeps them honest is not a source for the opinion. It is a public record of whether it was right.

In a call

  • A clear verdict and a confidence level
  • The reasoning, in the analyst's own voice
  • Humour about matchups, numbers and situations
  • Two analysts disagreeing about the same player

Never in a call

  • A statistic that is not in the evidence shown with it
  • Injury or depth-chart news that has not been confirmed twice
  • Anything about a real person's character, body, family or state of mind
  • Odds, lines, props or wagering advice
  • Our own projections presented as fact

Betting

No wagering advice in our coverage

Our stories and our calls contain no odds, no lines, no props, no picks against the spread and no "use code" anything. The Calls are fantasy decisions only.

Sportsbooks may advertise or sponsor on the site, under the rules in Independence and money: only where sports wagering is legal, only to readers 21 and over, always with responsible-gambling information, and never inside or beside a call.

Our own ingest is a separate matter. Gambling promotions arrive inside the feeds we read, formatted to look exactly like reporting — in one outlet's feed they were more than a third of the items. They are filtered out at ingest, before they can become a document, because a bonus-code page that reaches the extractor is indistinguishable from a story.

Synthetic analysts

Under Review publishes text. There are no video presenters and no generated voices today. If that changes, the rules below extend to cover it and this section says so on the day it happens, not after.

The editorial gate

Nothing publishes without a human. A named editor reviews every script against its ledger before render, and that approval is recorded with a name and a timestamp that appears on the published article. If the editor is unavailable, the edition does not go out. There is no automatic-publish path, no "approved by default after N minutes", and no scheduled render that fires without a signature.

The same applies to every call on The Calls: a draft is signed by name before kickoff or it never appears.

Corrections

Anything we publish that turns out to be wrong is corrected in place. Corrections are permanent, timestamped, and recorded in the public overturn record along with how long the error was live. We do not silently edit, we do not delete a signed call or ranking instead of correcting it, and we do not call a factual error a "clarification". Claims we held for insufficient sourcing are published too, in the ledger of the story they belonged to.

Independence and money

Under Review takes sponsorship and affiliate revenue — from sportsbooks, teams, leagues, fantasy platforms, ticket sellers and other brands. What money buys is space. It never buys coverage, a call, a grade or a correction.

Conflicts

The editor-in-chief discloses any professional relationship that touches a subject of coverage, and any fantasy league, contest or wager that could be affected by a story is disclosed or the story is not run. Because the analysts are synthetic they cannot themselves hold conflicts — but the human behind them can, and that is where disclosure applies.

Changes to this document

VersionDateChange
2.216 Sep 2026Money rules replaced. The earlier promise of no sportsbook, club, league or affiliate money is withdrawn; sponsorship and affiliate revenue are now accepted under disclosure, labelling and a firewall between money and coverage. Wagering advice remains out of our coverage.
2.116 Sep 2026The Calls added: start/sit and add/drop opinion from synthetic analysts, signed before kickoff, locked once signed, and graded in public. Replaces the rule that we do not make fantasy decisions.
2.016 Sep 2026Beat moved from politics and elections to NFL and fantasy football. Election rules replaced with injury, fantasy and betting rules. The limit of the sourcing rule stated explicitly rather than implied.
1.010 Sep 2026First publication, ahead of launch.

Amendments are published here with a date and a reason, never applied silently.