The Transcript

Established 1991. Independent. Editorially serious. Occasionally cited by people who did not finish reading the article.

Our Mission

The Transcript was founded on a simple conviction: that the public deserves accurate, impartial coverage of the events that shape the world, reported with rigour, written with care, and published without fear or favour. We have held to this conviction for thirty-five years. We intend to continue holding to it for as long as holding to things remains viable.

We cover politics, economics, world affairs, technology, health, culture and the environment. We do not cover celebrity gossip, lifestyle content, or events that, upon reflection, are not events. We have, on several occasions, declined to publish stories that were true but not particularly interesting. We consider this a form of editorial integrity, though our legal counsel has suggested we not say so publicly.

The Transcript does not have a political orientation. We have, over the years, been accused of bias by readers from every part of the political spectrum, which we take as evidence that we are doing something correctly, or possibly that we are doing something incorrectly in a symmetrical way. We have not been able to determine which.

Our History

The Transcript was established in 1991 by a group of journalists who had, between them, worked at eleven different publications that no longer exist. They believed a new kind of newspaper was possible: one that would report the news as it was, not as sources wished it to be reported, not as advertisers preferred it to be understood, and not as the editor's brother-in-law had suggested at Christmas. The first edition ran to four pages. Three of them were correct.

The publication expanded through the 1990s, opening bureaux in Washington, London, and a small office above a pharmacy in Brussels that has since been converted into a different small office. We launched our digital edition in 2004, which at the time was considered ambitious. We have since been told it was not ambitious enough, and that we should have done other things differently as well. We are reviewing these suggestions.

In 2019, The Transcript completed a transition to fully independent ownership. We are not owned by a media conglomerate, a telecommunications company, a government, a private equity firm, or a billionaire who has not yet decided what to do with a newspaper. We are owned by our editorial board, which has not yet decided what to do with a newspaper either, but for different reasons.

Editorial Standards

The Transcript adheres to the editorial standards of the Australian Press Council. All stories are subject to editorial review before publication. Corrections are published promptly and without qualification, except in cases where the original story was, on reflection, not wrong but simply misunderstood by readers in a way that reflects poorly on the readers rather than the story.

We do not publish unverified claims. We seek comment from all parties before publication and include their responses, or note that they did not respond, or note that they responded but said nothing useful, which we consider a form of response worth recording. We do not pay sources. We do not accept payments from sources. We have, on one occasion, accepted a very good coffee from a source, which we disclosed to our editor, who said it was fine.

Our journalists are required to declare conflicts of interest. We have a policy on the use of anonymous sources, the details of which are themselves, for structural reasons, not published. We are aware of the irony.

Our Staff

The Transcript employs correspondents across Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom and Europe. Our editorial staff includes journalists with experience at major national and international publications, as well as two interns who joined us recently and are doing their best.

Contact the Newsroom

Editorial enquiries, tip-offs, corrections and complaints may be directed to our newsroom. We read all correspondence. We respond to correspondence that warrants a response. We do not respond to correspondence asking why we did not respond to previous correspondence, as this creates a cycle we are not resourced to maintain.

Letters for publication should be sent via our Letters to the Editor page. We do not accept letters submitted by email that are also submitted via the letters page, as duplicate submissions suggest a level of anxiety about publication that, in our experience, does not resolve itself through publication.

[email protected]  ·  Response time: within two business days, or longer, or not at all if the matter has resolved itself in the interim.