Clean Nagaland is not a news publication. But we publish content: the public map, the monthly transparency snapshot, the pages explaining our work, and occasional posts when something material changes. This page explains the editorial standards those publications are held to.
For news coverage of Nagaland, see our sister site nagalandnewstoday.com, which has its own separate editorial policy.
What counts as editorial content on Clean Nagaland
- The public map. Approved alcohol pins and the information attached to them.
- The monthly transparency snapshot. Aggregate statistics published on the first of every month.
- Platform pages. About, Community Guidelines, How It Works, Safety and Self-Help, FAQ, and similar explanatory content.
- Policy pages. Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, Source Protection Policy, Takedown and Appeal.
- Announcements. Occasional posts about platform changes, killswitch activations, or major updates.
Reports submitted by residents are not editorial content. They are user submissions processed through moderation. The editorial layer is what the platform chooses to publish about those submissions, not the submissions themselves.
Editorial principles
Truth over speed
We would rather publish a correct number a day late than a wrong number on schedule. The monthly transparency snapshot goes live on the first of each month at 9:00 AM IST under normal conditions. If moderator audits reveal a data quality issue, publication is delayed until the issue is resolved. Explanation is posted on the same page.
Independence from sources
Clean Nagaland does not coordinate with law enforcement, government agencies, political parties, or liquor associations about what to publish or when. Our editorial calendar is set internally. Outside pressure, even well-intentioned, does not move publication deadlines forward or back.
Transparency about method
When we publish a statistic, readers should be able to understand how it was calculated. The monthly transparency page includes definitions for every category counted. The Community Guidelines and Content Disclaimer explain how moderator decisions are made. Readers who want to audit our work have enough information to do so.
Minimum viable exposure
We publish the minimum detail needed to make the platform credible and useful. Map pins show district, category, and report count. They do not show the reporter, the original description, or photos. Aggregate statistics show counts, not individual cases. This is a deliberate editorial choice to protect residents from over-exposure.
Correction over denial
When we are wrong, we correct publicly. Silent edits of published statistics are not permitted. Correction notes appear on the same page as the original error, dated and signed.
Sourcing standards
The editorial content on Clean Nagaland draws on three kinds of sources:
Platform data
Numbers published in the monthly transparency snapshot come directly from our internal database. The build process runs automatically, reads logged events from the audit trail, and generates the snapshot. The snapshot is reviewed by a moderator before publication. The same code path generates the public version and the internal version, so the numbers match.
Moderator decisions
Pins on the map and rejected reports reflect moderator judgments applied to submissions. Moderators work from a shared set of Community Guidelines. Every decision is logged with a timestamp, a user ID, and a reason code. Decisions are spot-checked by Aloto Naga and by rotating senior moderators for consistency.
External information
When platform pages reference external facts, such as helpline numbers, government program names, or partner types, we verify the information against current primary sources before publication. If an external fact changes after we publish, we update the page when we become aware of the change.
We do not use anonymous sources in the journalistic sense on this platform. Our entire system is designed around anonymous reporters, but the editorial content we publish about those reports is not shaped by individual anonymous voices. It is shaped by moderator judgment, platform data, and verifiable external information.
What we will not publish
- Names of individual reporters. Never, under any circumstances, regardless of how a reporter might request it.
- Names of individuals alleged to be involved in illegal activity. The platform is about locations and patterns, not persons.
- Names of partner organizations handling specific cases. Partners are listed as a category in aggregate transparency, never tied to individual reports.
- Photos or videos submitted by reporters. Media is used for moderator verification only. Public publication would destroy the protection reporters rely on.
- Drug report details. Drug reports are never shown publicly. Aggregate counts only.
- Precise GPS coordinates. Pins are snapped to a 50-meter grid before publication.
- Unverified claims about identifiable institutions. If a report mentions a named church, school, or government office, the reference is stripped before the pin goes live.
- Content that incites violence, hatred, or discrimination. Reports containing such content are rejected rather than published.
How we handle corrections
Errors fall into a few categories, each handled differently:
Pin errors
If a pin is inaccurate, outdated, or unfairly placed on a legitimate location, the Takedown and Appeal process handles it. Pins that cannot be supported after review are removed. The takedown decision is logged.
Statistical errors
If we discover an error in the monthly transparency numbers after publication, we correct the page and add a dated correction note at the top. The erroneous version is not deleted from history. Readers can see what changed and when.
Factual errors on platform pages
If we discover an error in About, Community Guidelines, FAQ, or similar pages, we correct it. For material errors (wrong legal reference, wrong helpline number, wrong operational fact), the correction includes a note explaining what changed. For minor clarifications, correction is made without a note.
Errors in external reporting about Clean Nagaland
If a news outlet, researcher, or other party publishes inaccurate claims about our platform, we reach out to request correction. We do not sue over errors, but we do document them. Persistent inaccuracy is noted publicly if it affects reporter safety or public trust.
Editorial roles and responsibilities
Aloto Naga, Founder and operational lead
Final accountability for all editorial content on Clean Nagaland. Signs off on the monthly transparency snapshot, approves changes to platform pages, and handles appeals of moderator decisions. Personal site visits for operator-verified pins are also his responsibility.
Moderators
Day-to-day editorial decisions about which reports become public pins, which reports are rejected, and which require additional review. Moderators work from shared guidelines. Individual moderators do not write editorial copy or update platform pages.
Technical team
Maintains the platform that generates the map and the transparency snapshot. Technical changes that affect how data is categorized, counted, or displayed are reviewed against editorial standards before going live.
Partner organizations
Partners are not part of the editorial team. Partners handle forwarded drug cases in private. Partner names and activities are not subject of editorial coverage on Clean Nagaland.
Separation from commercial interests
Clean Nagaland does not run advertising. It does not accept sponsored content. It does not take payment to place, remove, hide, or highlight any pin or statistic.
Nagaland Me funds Clean Nagaland from revenue generated by other properties, primarily the Aloto Naga TV YouTube channel and advertising on Nagaland News Today. Those revenue sources do not influence Clean Nagaland’s editorial decisions. A political party that advertises on Nagaland News Today has no special standing here. A business that appears on nagalandprofiles.com has no special protection from being reported on the map.
Attempts to leverage other Nagaland Me relationships to influence Clean Nagaland editorial decisions are documented and escalated to Aloto Naga.
Takedown of our own content
Clean Nagaland may voluntarily take down its own editorial content in limited circumstances:
- Safety. If published content is putting identifiable people at risk (for example, a pin too precise in a small community where residents can guess who reported), we take down promptly and review what happened.
- Error. If published content is factually wrong in a way that misleads readers materially.
- Legal order. A valid order from a court of competent jurisdiction.
- Platform pause. During an active killswitch event, submission forms show a maintenance message but historical pins and transparency data remain visible unless directly implicated in the pause.
We do not take down editorial content because a subject dislikes being reported, because a political figure applies pressure, or because a government department requests informal removal outside legal process.
Plagiarism and attribution
Content on Clean Nagaland is written by the Nagaland Me team. We do not copy from other sources. When we draw on external frameworks (such as standard categories for civic technology, widely-used helpline directories, or well-known legal definitions), we state the source where relevant.
Other people may quote from our published pages. We welcome fair use of our content with attribution. See the Media Kit for how journalists and researchers should cite the platform.
Reader feedback on editorial decisions
If a reader believes our editorial content is wrong, misleading, unfair, or harmful, we want to know. The channels are:
- For pin-specific issues, use Takedown and Appeal.
- For statistical or factual issues on platform pages, use the Contact page with subject line starting “Editorial correction.”
- For structural or policy disagreements, use the Contact page. Material critiques inform future revisions.
We read every submission. We respond where a response is useful. We do not respond to abuse, threats, or bulk complaint campaigns.
Relationship with law enforcement
Clean Nagaland is editorially independent of law enforcement. We do not coordinate on timing, placement, or content of pins. We do not brief police before publication. We do not adjust editorial decisions based on what law enforcement would prefer to see.
When a pin, a statistic, or editorial content attracts law enforcement interest, we respond through the legal process described in the Source Protection Policy. We do not provide early access, preview copies, or editorial input.
Relationship with government
Clean Nagaland is editorially independent of all government bodies, including Nagaland state government, the central government, and local village councils. We will cover developments that affect our scope (new laws, new programs, changes in legal environment) if those developments are material to how residents use the platform.
We do not participate in government-run campaigns, joint branding exercises, or co-authored content.
Relationship with political actors
Clean Nagaland is strictly non-partisan. Reports are evaluated on their contents, not on which community, political affiliation, or region they concern. Political actors who try to use the platform as a campaign tool, either by weaponizing reports against opponents or by demanding favorable treatment, are documented and, where the abuse rises to a campaign scale, publicly noted.
Changes to this policy
Material changes to this editorial policy are announced for at least 30 days before taking effect. Minor clarifications and corrections can be made at any time. The effective date of the current version is at the bottom of the page.
The policy itself is intended to evolve as we learn from operating the platform. If you have suggestions for how our editorial practice could be stronger, use the Contact page.
Effective from: April 2026. Last updated: April 2026.