colofon · 05

Editorial standards

Vroeg is an AI-driven editorial team. Discipline is what separates 'AI-generated' from 'journalism with AI as instrument'. Here's how.


## Mission Vroeg serves a specific reader: the Belgian or EU investor, policymaker, or AI practitioner who, for a decision, needs to know quickly **what changed this week in EU AI policy or AI markets, how certain it is, and where the primary sources are**. Not for the general public. Not for consumer AI news. Not for hype. ## Scope Vroeg covers only: - **EU AI Act enforcement** — application, AI Office output, delegated acts, GPAI codes, Member State implementations, EDPB opinions. - **Belgian + Dutch AI capacity** — imec, ASML, KU Leuven, UGent, VUB, TU Delft, INRIA-Lille, regional AI startups. - **EU AI sovereignty** — semiconductor supply chain, Chips Act, Mistral, Aleph Alpha, GPU allocations. - **AI in regulated EU sectors** — healthtech (EMA), fintech (DORA), defense + dual-use (EDF, NATO DIANA). - **Comparative AI policy** — EU vs US vs China, evergreen content. Out of scope: general AI news without a Low Countries angle; consumer AI; LLM hype cycles; tech-CEO-quote pieces; opinion without primary-source foundation.

Source ladder

Every claim in a Vroeg article must rest on at least one source from the following hierarchy, in decreasing preference: 1. **Primary legislative text** — EUR-Lex, Belgian Gazette, `journal-officiel.gouv.fr`, EU Official Journal, COM documents. 2. **Official authority output** — EU AI Office, EDPB, EBA, EMA, FSMA, FOD Economie, Dutch AP, BeCert, BeIA. 3. **Listed-issuer filings** — SEC filings, ASML investor relations, ECB stress-tests, Bank of England Working Papers, EBA risk dashboards. 4. **Peer-reviewed academic work** — arXiv (with preprint disclaimer), OpenAlex, conference proceedings (NeurIPS, ICML, ACL, COLM, ICLR). 5. **Own primary source** — direct interview, FOIA/access request, datasets Vroeg has published. 6. **Verified secondary source** — Reuters, AP, AFP, Bloomberg, FT, NRC, De Tijd, L'Echo, Politico Europe, EURACTIV — with direct link to the original publication. 7. **Unverified secondary source** — blogs, press releases, conference talks without transcripts. Permitted **only** as support for secondary claims (background, colour), never as the sole source for material assertions. Every claim has at least one source from level 1-5; material numbers have at least two independent sources from level 1-4.

Falsifier protocol

Every Vroeg article carrying a testable prediction also publishes: - the **claim** — one sentence, unambiguous - the **deadline** — a specific date on which the claim becomes testable - the **falsification criterion** — what evidence would constitute proof that the claim was wrong Predictions are recorded at `/en/voorspellingen` with status `open`. On the deadline, the claim is tested against primary sources and moved to `verified`, `falsified`, or `expired`. The track-record is public and never updated retrospectively. Wrong predictions are not deleted — that's the whole point.

AI pipeline + human validation

Vroeg articles are written by an automated editorial pipeline (source code open at github.com/chutapp/vroeg). The pipeline does: 1. **Signal detection** — three parallel layers scan primary sources weekly. 2. **Multi-perspective synthesis** — 9 journalistic "modes" run in parallel with explicit no-fabrication prompts. 3. **Citation-grounded RAG** — every claim is generated with literal `[F#]` / `[E#]` citations to a fixed corpus. 4. **Claim auditor + self-revision** — a separate LLM pass screens every material claim and sends the piece back for revision if support is missing. 5. **URL HEAD verifier + entity-status check** — broken links and retracted entities are caught before publication. **Human validation is not optional.** From Phase 2 (scheduled Q3 2026) onwards, the publication pipeline blocks articles not approved by at least one volunteer reader from the reader corps. In Phase 1 — before the reader corps is operational — every edition is manually approved by the responsible editor (see colophon).

Conflicts of interest

- Vroeg accepts no advertising, sponsorship, or advertorials. - Vroeg accepts no compensation for writing about specific entities or policy dossiers. - Donations (Phase 5) are publicly recorded; donors have no influence on editorial choices. - The responsible editor publishes their current investments and board mandates on the colophon page; for every material investment that comes up in an article, an explicit disclosure line is added.

Correction + retraction

See the public corrections log for the full process. In brief: - **Typographic correction** — silently patched. - **Material factual correction** — publicly logged, with date, description and new SHA-256 in the Phrack footer. - **Retraction** — for serious error (wrong primary interpretation, non-existent source, non-existent entity) the article is marked with a prominent "RETRACTED" banner and stays online for archiving; the URL returns HTTP 200 with `noindex`.

Source protection

For human sources (Phase 2+): - Vroeg never uses identifying details (function + company + gender) when a source asks for anonymity; we abstract to "an EU-AI-Office insider" or "a Belgian compliance officer". - Email sources are kept on an end-to-end encrypted channel (Signal or ProtonMail). - For highly sensitive tips: Vroeg receives via SecureDrop — set up in Phase 2.

Diversity

- Vroeg aims for gender and geographic diversity in the sources cited and in the reader corps that validates articles. - Not just male C-suite quotes. Not just Brussels perspective. - Coverage of the Netherlands, Wallonia, Flanders, and the three smallest EU states (Luxembourg, Malta, Cyprus) stays actively in scope despite their limited demand. ## Independence Vroeg is not an organ of EU institutions, the Belgian federal government, or any private AI company. Vroeg receives no institutional funding with editorial strings.