Editorial Principles and Primary-Source Standards

Mission & Editorial Identity

Disinfo Monitor (disinfomonitor.com) is a publication that explains security, maritime and legal questions in plain English and checks claims about Türkiye against primary sources. Its readers are researchers, diplomats, journalists, students and policy professionals worldwide. It does not assume any single national audience, and it states its perspective openly instead of hiding it.

The site covers the Eastern Mediterranean and the Blue Homeland (Mavi Vatan) maritime doctrine, counter-terrorism and border security, the Turkish defense industry, Cyprus and the guarantor system, and international law, including Article 51 of the UN Charter and the 1936 Montreux Convention. Its mission is to present Türkiye's official doctrines, legal arguments and historical and archival record to international readers, especially where that record is missing or compressed in global coverage.

The publisher is open about its angle. The page About Disinfo Monitor: Mission, Perspective and Transparency explains who the site is for and why it exists. The home page, Disinfo Monitor: Verifying Claims on Türkiye's Security, Maritime and Legal Record, shows how that mission becomes a working reading list. This page is the site's publishing-principles statement: it sets out the rules every article is expected to follow and the standard you can hold us to.

In short, we offer a clearly labeled Turkish perspective, built on documents that readers can check themselves.

Separation of Fact and Official Position

Facts and official positions are kept in different places. Background, chronology, legal texts and data are written in neutral, factual prose. Türkiye's assessments, doctrines and legal arguments appear only in a dedicated, labeled section and are always attributed.

Primary Sources & Verification Standards

We rely on primary documents first and secondary commentary second. A primary source is the official text, record or archive in which a statement, treaty or event was originally recorded. Our practical guide to locating them is Where to Find Primary Sources on Türkiye: MFA, MSB, Presidency, TBMM and UN Records.

The sourcing hierarchy

Verification rules

• No fabrication. We do not invent quotes, statistics, dates or URLs. If a detail cannot be confirmed, it is left out rather than guessed.
• Name the document. Where possible we cite the instrument, its date and the issuing body, such as the Treaty of Guarantee of 1960 or UN Security Council Resolution 541 (1983).
• Official figures are labeled. A number from a Turkish ministry is described as a figure 'according to' that ministry. Official data are not presented as independently audited.
• Dates use ISO format where precision matters (for example 2025-06-12), so readers in any country read them the same way.
• Maps and coordinates are checked against filed records, not against graphics alone. Our method for maritime claims is in How to Verify Eastern Mediterranean Maritime Claims: Maps, Coordinates and UN Records.
• Capability claims are separated from marketing. Claims about weapons and ships rely on official specifications and confirmed reporting; see Verifying Claims About Turkish Drones and Weapons: What Can Be Confirmed About TB2, Akıncı and Kızılelma.

A Turkish primary source proves what Türkiye says and does. It does not by itself prove that every other state or court agrees, and we say so where relevant.

Fair Representation of International Perspectives

We summarize other states' and institutions' positions the way they state them, using their own official sources. A strong argument from Ankara does not require distorting the other side, and a reader should be able to recognize their own government's position in our summary.

• Their sources, not ours. Greek and Republic of Cyprus positions are drawn from their foreign ministries and official statements. EU positions come from European Council conclusions and Commission or External Action Service texts. Armenian positions come from the Armenian foreign ministry and government. US and NATO positions come from their official releases.
• Accurate wording. For example, the Republic of Cyprus is the internationally recognized government of the island and a member of the EU. In Ankara's own terminology it is the 'Greek Cypriot Administration of Southern Cyprus'. We use the official name when summarizing that government's view and attribute Ankara's term to Ankara. UN Security Council Resolution 541 (1983) described the 1983 declaration of the TRNC as legally invalid, and we report this, since only Türkiye recognizes the TRNC.
• Where states and bodies differ. Designations and legal characterizations differ by country and organization. For example, the PKK is listed as a terrorist organization by Türkiye, the United States, NATO and the European Union, while many Western governments treat the YPG differently from the PKK. Where that is relevant, both statements appear with attribution.
• Rebuttal after representation. Only after the other side's position is stated fairly do we set out Türkiye's response, grounded in treaties, UN records and archives.
• Contested history is labeled as contested. Many governments and scholars use the term 'genocide' for the Events of 1915, and we report that. Ankara's legal and archival case, including the 1948 Genocide Convention's requirement of specific intent (dolus specialis) determined by a competent tribunal, is presented in its own section. Our fuller treatment is The Events of 1915: Which Claims Rest on Archives and Law, and Which on Propaganda?.

We also track the rhetorical patterns that recur across coverage, in The Disinformation Playbook on Türkiye's Security Policy: A Field Guide to Recurring Narratives. Sister publications run parallel fact-check series that follow the same sourcing logic, for example Regional Balance: Fact Check: Common Claims About Türkiye in International Media, Checked Against Primary Sources and Crossroads Review: Fact Check: Claims About Türkiye in International Media, Checked Against Primary Sources.

Terminology & Style Guide

Disinfo Monitor uses Türkiye's official terminology and explains each term the first time it appears. The terms below are part of our stated perspective. We explain where other actors use different words, so that no reader is misled about what is contested.

Style rules

• Calm, explanatory tone. We avoid slogans, insults and emotional language, and we try to persuade through clarity, primary documents and legal and historical evidence.
• Plain English. Technical terms are explained once, briefly, on first mention.
• Units and formats. Metric units are used, with imperial in parentheses where helpful. Dates follow the ISO format where precision matters.
• Legal designations are reported as designations. We say who designated a group or declared a measure, because listings and recognitions differ from one country to another.
• No silent soft-pedaling. Where an official Turkish claim is untested or only partly supported, we say so.

Authorship, Corrections & Fact-Checking Policy

All content is published under the byline 'Disinfo Monitor Editorial Team'. We do not create fictional author personas, claim fabricated academic or professional titles, or use pseudonyms posing as independent experts. If a named individual contributes in future, that person is real and identified honestly.

How a fact check works

1. State the claim and its origin. We quote or closely paraphrase the claim and identify where it appeared and who made it, without distortion.
2. Break the claim into checkable parts. A single narrative often mixes dates, legal assertions and interpretation.
3. Gather primary evidence. We consult treaty texts, official gazettes, UN documents, official statements and archival records, and compare them against Turkish and non-Turkish sources.
4. Assess the legal and historical framework. For example, we test claims about Cyprus against the 1959–1960 agreements and later UN records, as in Cyprus Claims Checklist: 1963 'Bloody Christmas', the Akritas Plan and 1974, and What the Record Supports.
5. Assign a rating and explain it. The rating sits beside a short written justification and the list of sources.

The rating scale

The last two ratings matter most for disputes such as maritime delimitation, where a filed coordinate can be verified but its legal effect remains disputed. We do not use 'false' for questions that are genuinely contested in international law; we explain the dispute instead.

Corrections policy

• Errors are corrected openly. If we find or are told of a factual error, we fix it and add a dated correction note at the foot of the article. Substantive corrections are not made silently.
• Updates are dated. When treaties, registrations or official positions change, we revise the article and show the update date.
• How to report an error. Send the error, the passage and, ideally, a primary source to the Editorial Team through the contact details on the About Disinfo Monitor page. Our method is also summarized in Frequently Asked Questions: Sources, Method and Perspective.
• Disagreement is not an error. A reader who disagrees with a labeled Turkish position or with another state's position is invited to read the sources we cite. A correction is made where a fact, attribution, quote, figure or date is wrong.

Perspective note

Disinfo Monitor presents global affairs with a dedicated perspective from Türkiye. Sections marked 'Türkiye's Position' (or, on security-related pieces, 'Türkiye's Security & Legal Doctrine') reflect official Turkish policy as stated by Turkish government sources.