Why every newsroom needs a transparency editor

This article is from our community spotlight section, written by and for our journalism community.

We want to hear about your challenges, breakthroughs and experiences. Want to contribute? Get in touch and help shape the discussion around the future of journalism.

Just 40 per cent of people trust the news, according to the Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2025. That’s not just a statistic, it’s an existential threat. For decades, journalism responded to trust crises with its claim to be objective, but it’s clear that approach no longer cuts it.

This isn’t just about misinformation or declining revenues. We’ve moved from information scarcity to attention scarcity, fundamentally changing the game.

Journalism now competes with influencers, state actors, activists, and AI-generated content all fighting for the same attention. The danger is the imitation game: competitors copy journalistic formats without adopting journalistic standards.

To audiences, a person with a microphone asking questions looks the same whether they’re bound by editorial standards or not. If we want the audience to know we are different, we have to show and tell.

So the solution isn’t better PR or production values. It’s radical transparency about how we work - and that necessitates a new, dedicated newsroom position. The transparency editor.

What transparency actually means

Radical transparency is not rocket science. It simply means showing your workings. It means revealing your process and letting readers judge your reasoning. Transparency consists of three main pillars: story, maker, and public.

The Story pillar involves process transparency: things like explaining how you reported, how much time it took to get the story, which sources you used, what you couldn’t verify, and which questions remain unanswered.

The Maker pillar covers author and organisational transparency. Who wrote the story, what is the expertise of the journalist on the subject, and is there any personal link between the journalist and the story? Also extremely important: who actually funded the story? Who pays the journalist, and who owns the platform it is published on? And what is the mission statement of the publication? All these things should be easy to find.

The Public pillar addresses audience engagement and gives the public a sense of how they can contribute to the story. For example, how they can add information or how the public can send in corrections or challenge certain claims. But also why a story is relevant to the public and (in some cases) what they can do after reading the story.

This kind of transparency can’t be optional. It has to be somebody's job. If you want to regain the trust of the public, it should be more than some good intentions that only exist on paper. It should be a lived reality for everyone in the newsroom. No story should be published without asking what kind of transparency is needed.

To make this happen, you need to have a transparency infrastructure, for example:

• Templates that prompt reporters to document methodology
• Style guides that standardise how to explain ethical decisions
• Checklists ensuring nothing gets missed 

Without someone building and maintaining this infrastructure (and keeping an eye on it), transparency gets lost in the day-to-day hustle and bustle.

What does the Transparency editor do?

A transparency editor has three core responsibilities, each addressing a specific gap in current practice.

Transparency control means reviewing stories before publication and asking the questions readers might ask. This editor becomes the reader’s advocate inside the newsroom, catching gaps in explanation before publication. They ensure every investigation includes methodology, every anonymous source comes with justification, and every correction includes context.

Infrastructure building involves creating the systems that make transparency easier, not harder. This means developing templates for methodology boxes, building transparency features into the content management system, designing correction formats that explain rather than hide, and creating checklists that reporters actually use. The goal is to make adding transparency to the story easy.

Host workshops to transform newsroom culture and train reporters to understand that showing their work strengthens rather than weakens their authority. Coach editors on which questions to ask during story review. Demonstrate how transparency defuses criticism by addressing questions proactively.

Ethics live in the stores, not in handbooks

Every newsroom has an ethics code, but too often it’s just a document gathering dust. The transparency editor’s job is to make those principles visible in daily work.

Readers appreciate honesty about difficult choices. Why we included or omitted details. How we weighed privacy versus public interest. When we invite readers into our process, it builds trust over time.

But what about the cost I hear you object. To that I say: can we afford continued declines in trust? Outlets that can’t rebuild credibility will lose audiences, advertisers, and relevance.

There are ways to spread the costs. Try rotating responsibility or adopting a peer-review system.

You’ll know transparency is working when reader responses change. Comments discuss methodology, not just conclusions, and tips increase as sources trust your process.

We must show, not just tell. Hire a transparency editor and build systematic infrastructure or risk continued decline as competitors capture the audiences we’re losing. Transparency isn’t a luxury, it’s an essential investment in survival.

Thank you for reading this community spotlight piece. These articles help shape the discussion around the future of journalism. Want to write one for us? We'd love to hear from you.