[Editor’s note: These publishing guidelines were last updated on March. 3, 2023]

By Krysta, Editor-in-Chief, prides itself on the quality of the informed, opinionated analysis we provide. Our writers and editors work tirelessly to ensure the stories and content we publish meet the rigid standards of our publishing guidelines. These standards encourage writers to utilize their unique experiences to create compelling stories and content that are 1) backed by facts, 2) free from outside influence, and 3) are transparent in the disclosure of potential conflicts of interest.

We aren’t perfect. But we are committed to doing our best to get it right and serve our readers. If you believe we have fallen short, please reach out to us via email.

   On Opinionated Writing:

Not all of writers are trained journalists. We intend to inform, educate, and entertain our readers, but we do not attempt to be unbiased in the way that journalists strive for.

No one can predict with 100% certainty what will happen in the future, but we can make educated guesses based on logical arguments. While Indie Volt Media LLC strives for fair and fact-based commentary, our content typically leans toward actionable logical advice and conclusions based on our writers’ perspectives. This means that our content, unless otherwise stated, is the opinion of the writer, and the writer alone even in cases where content may include identifiers such as “we”, “us” etc.


  On Differences of Opinion:

We often publish multiple points of view on the same product, and readers may encounter articles that offer conflicting advice or opinons on the same product. We encourage our readers to read and consider these multiple points of view in instances in which there are conflicting opinions on a product. In fact, we embrace that diversity of opinion because we believe it improves the overall understanding of a company’s product, and thus serves our readers.

In many cases, we will publish opinion articles that go against conventional wisdom and subvert the status quo. These stories may challenge our readers’ own opinions and elicit emotional responses. We aim to do so respectfully, and do so to bring readers multiple perspectives to best stimulate their own thinking on a subject. We also encourage our authors to revisit their analysis of a product or happening when the facts change or new details emerge. content contains fact-based news and data that is carefully checked for accuracy. Our content also contains analysis-based opinionated commentary. For this reason, all articles will feature the following disclaimer, with a link to this page, at the end of the article:

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the writer, subject to the Publishing Guidelines.

  On Ownership Disclosures: writers are passionate about independent entertainment and independently product products and content, and many hold positions in various spaces. At the same time, we understand that there is both real and implied bias that may come with writing about a company that the writer owns or has dealings with.

Many of our writers expressly avoid covering products they have made themselves, or have relationships with members who a production team in large part because we often hear from readers that they don’t want any real or perceived bias in our articles. believes in transparency and we owe it to our readers to be clear regarding a writer’s position in any company or product he or she is involved in. As such, we demand all writers disclose if they or a spouse/partner/relative/associate/colleague have worked on, own any portion whatsoever of or have had a hand in developing/development of and in any product mentioned in each article so that our readers can make up their own mind about what impact that relationship may have on the writer’s opinion. Further, our editors are prohibited from allowing their relationships from influencing the editorial feedback they would provide to writers.

  On Review Prohibitions:

Writers are prohibited from reviewing any product in an article on for 90 days after working in whole or part with the I.P owner/company.

  On Outside Compensation for Favorable Analysis:

Except in limited instances, we compensate our writers for the articles they write. All writers publishing on are prohibited from accepting outside compensation to publish reviews in favor of or against a given product for articles that appear on our website.

  On Covering Independent content:

There are many definitions for the term “indie,” but most definitions refer to companies whose entire workforce is under 100 persons and privately owned. In accordance with this view, generally seeks to publish content on comapnies and products that fit that criteria.

In instances where we deem a “mainstream indie” (having over 100 employees or its ownership held by a larger organization) worthy of coverage Indie Volt may publish an article on the company, which will include the following disclosure:

With only the rarest exceptions, Indie Volt does not publish commentary about products from companies that have a large employee base and whose owners, holding companies etc, are listed on stock markets.

  On Sourcing and Facts: asks writers to link directly to primary sources when citing stats. We have a team of editors who check numbers to help ensure accuracy at the time of publication. Whenever our writers cite work is done by another organization, we strive to link to it. If our writers are making a claim outside of a review, we ask that they provide a link when one is available.

We welcome our readers to contact the editors of directly if they encounter errors or other factual inconsistencies.

  On Linking to Sources:

If our writers have quoted from another article, we ask that they link to the original source of the information. If any of our writers incorporates another author’s work in order to bolster their own argument, it must be properly credited. If the source is something we can’t link to — a research note that isn’t publicly available — we will still explicitly name the source.

We do all of this because proper sourcing and use of links helps the reader. Further, it also allows our readers to verify the veracity of our writers’ claims.

  On Plagiarism:

Plagiarism is strictly prohibited. While has content sharing arrangements with other partners, we never reuse the work of others without their consent or clear attribution.

 On Primary Sources:

We believe the entertainment reporting media plays an important function in the everyday decisions of our readers. Therefore, it is incumbent on us to publish authoritative content with facts and opinions our readers can trust. For this reason, our writers may include exclusive quotes from primary sources. When used, these sources provide essential background information to our writers’ arguments and help explain complex topics in language that’s accessible. Any information gathered directly from primary sources will be used in one of, or a combination of, the following: quoting or paraphrasing. When quoting, the source’s words are used in the article verbatim and presented in quotation marks (“) with their desired attribution. When our writers paraphrase, the context of the source’s quote is rewritten in the writer’s own words. Paraphrased remarks will not appear in quotations but will feature attribution.