Editorial Standards & Ethics

The rules we work under

Crypto media has an earned credibility problem: undisclosed bag-holding, paid articles dressed as news, coverage that exists to move a price. CRYPTO PULZE was set up with written rules designed against exactly those failures. This page is those rules, published so readers can hold us to them.

Independence

Our coverage decisions are made by the editorial team and no one else. No exchange, token project, foundation, market maker, or advertiser chooses what we cover, previews our articles, or edits our conclusions. We do not accept payment, tokens, or other consideration in exchange for coverage, favorable framing, or silence. When a company offers us money to write about them “as news,” the answer is no, every time; the paid route exists, it is called advertising, and it is labeled.

Personal holdings: the conflict rule

People who follow crypto closely often hold crypto, and pretending otherwise would be dishonest. So our policy is built on disclosure and firewalls rather than fiction:

• No undisclosed holdings behind coverage. No one may write or edit a story about an asset in which they hold a material position without disclosing that position to the editor, and where relevant, in the article.
• No trading on the story. Team members may not trade an asset ahead of our coverage of it, or use unpublished information to trade at any time. This is the journalistic equivalent of insider dealing and it is a firing offense.
• No project involvement. Team members may not accept token allocations, advisory positions, or bounties from projects we might cover.

No pump coverage

We do not publish articles designed to generate buying pressure: no “next 100x” listicles, no price predictions presented as certainties, no breathless coverage of illiquid tokens whose only news is that they went up, no amplification of coordinated shill campaigns. When a small-cap asset moves violently, the journalistic question is why, and the honest answer is often thin liquidity or coordinated promotion, which is what we will write if that is what we find. If an article would function as a buy signal rather than as information, it does not run.

Sourcing

Claims must trace to primary sources: official announcements, regulatory filings, court records, audited data, on-chain evidence, or named sources in a position to know. Anonymous sourcing is used when the information matters and the source has a genuine reason to fear attribution, never to launder rumor. Social media posts are treated as claims to verify, not facts to repeat; the verification workflow is in our Fact-Checking Policy.

Sponsored content, labeled without exception

Any content that exists because someone paid for it carries a clear label such as “Sponsored” or “Partner Content,” visually distinct from news, at the top of the piece, not the bottom. Sponsored content is never written by our news team, never covers the sponsor’s token price outlook, and never appears in ways designed to be mistaken for reporting. Affiliate links, where present, are disclosed in the article that contains them. The commercial rules are laid out further in Advertise With Us and Ownership & Funding.

Headlines and framing

The headline must be defensible by the article, and the article must be defensible by the evidence. We do not write “BREAKING” over routine news, do not state rumors as facts in headlines and walk them back in paragraph six, and do not use price emojis, rocket imagery, or fear-mongering to juice clicks. Readers arriving from a headline should never feel the article sold them something else.

Fairness and the right of reply

When reporting includes significant criticism of an identifiable project or company, we seek comment before publication where practical and include the response, or note that none came, in the piece. Being pro-reader does not mean being anti-industry; it means the same rules for everyone.

Accountability

Errors are handled openly under our Corrections Policy. If you believe any article breaches the standards on this page, including a conflict you think went undisclosed, write to support@cryptopulze.com with the article link and your reasoning. Complaints about our ethics go to the top of the pile, and a policy breach confirmed by that review will be acknowledged on the article itself.