Our mission is to inspire and empower people to live their healthiest lives, every day. At Everyday Health, we bridge the gap between lifestyle and medical sites, delivering trusted health information as well as fun-to-read tips and insights that make life a little easier. We are committed to providing our audience with trusted, evidence-based health and medical information from the nation’s leading healthcare providers and patient advocates at the center of clinical care. Our editorial team is comprised of passionate, award-winning health and medical journalists. We have a team of board-certified medical reviewers who are practicing specialists in their fields. All medically reviewed content identifies the specialist who conducted the review. Our articles are written by health and medical journalists, patient advocates, and healthcare professionals who are committed to Everyday Health’s editorial standards for accuracy, objectivity, and balance. In cases where issues are not clear-cut, these editorial standards will act as guidelines rather than a set of absolute “dos and don’ts.” These standards are intended to help examine and thoughtfully resolve editorial dilemmas. Staff are responsible for initiating such discussions with their editors and managers when they encounter a perceived editorial issue. For advice on legal matters related to Everyday Health, immediately consult the Everyday Health legal team. The questions a reporter and editor should answer in order to reach a solution include (but may not be limited to):

  1. What do I know? What do I need to know?
  2. What is my journalistic purpose? 
  3. What are my ethical concerns?
  4. What organizational policies and professional guidelines should I consider?
  5. How can I include other people, with different perspectives and diverse ideas, in the decision-making process?
  6. Who are the stakeholders — those affected by my decision? What are their motivations? Which are legitimate?
  7. What if the roles were reversed? How would I feel if I were in the shoes of one of the stakeholders?
  8. What are the possible consequences of my actions? Short term? Long term?
  9. What are my alternatives to maximize my truth-telling responsibility and minimize harm?
  10. Can I clearly and fully justify my thinking and my decision? To my colleagues? To the stakeholders? To the public? Each situation and its resolution should be documented. The following details should be saved to a shared drive on the Everyday Health server: 1) a short summary of the issue, 2) the resolution, 3) steps taken to resolve the issue, and 4) what steps should be taken to prevent similar situations in the future. Editorial supervisors should meet twice yearly to review these documents, learn from past experiences, and update Everyday Health Editorial Standards as necessary.

Attributing Information

If a reporter uses another website, book, article, database, or any other supporting information that is not common knowledge, it must be cited.Whenever possible, particularly if a source is central to the article premise and position, a story should cite and link to the source material referenced.In some cases, it may be appropriate to attribute breaking news to a credible third-party source until an Everyday Health story is available. The source should be cited appropriately.

Citing Sources

If the source is not a well-known media outlet, journal, or individual, the reporter should include a brief description.The reporter should include a source’s professional, business, and personal affiliations (e.g., ties to pharmaceutical or other companies), and relationship to other source material mentioned (e.g., study authorship).Conflicts of interest must be noted as close to the top of the story as possible.A source’s qualification and relevance to the subject (e.g., patient or medical or health professional) must be clearly stated.If using social media for sourcing, a reporter should make sure to verify source identity.

Anonymous Sources

Sources should always be fully identified. In rare instances where a source may be in legal or physical jeopardy, the reporter must discuss the situation with editors and be prepared to identify source to their editor.A reporter should always question the motives of sources coming forward with information that they do not wish to be associated with by name, and communicate those motives to readers.When it is deemed appropriate to withhold information about a source, the reporter should use the most complete description of the source possible (e.g., first name and occupation).In discussing attribution, a reporter should make every effort to allow identification. Identifying sources lends credibility to stories and engenders audience trust.Anything a source says “on the record” can be reported. A source who agrees to be interviewed for a story is presumed to be speaking on the record unless there is an express agreement that the any part or all of the interview is “off the record.”“Off the record” information can be used if it is confirmed with another source who speaks on the record.A reporter may withhold a source’s name if there is an express agreement that certain information given is “not for attribution.” The attribution should give as much information about the source as possible and agreed upon.Explain “off the record” and “not for attribution” to sources using the definitions above.The reporter should make sure the source understands and agrees on the meaning of the above terms. Once a decision regarding “off the record” or “not for attribution” information has been made, it is important to protect that decision.

External Reviews of Content

In general, noneditorial personnel should not preview an unpublished article. Exceptions include “medically reviewed by” articles submitted to medical experts.It is acceptable to vocally read direct quotes back to sources. Discuss the situation with an editor if the source requires further information or context.It may be acceptable to allow a source referred to in an article to review relevant sections, quotes, or other details in a story to ensure accuracy and clarity. Subject matter and other circumstances will determine how much of the article may be released for review. Reporters should first discuss any such requests with their editor.The decision to submit content for external review is at the discretion of the reporter and the editor.

All of our content is reviewed by a team of copy editors to ensure accuracy and consistency of editorial style as well as voice. Our team of board-certified medical reviewers are practicing specialists in their fields who help readers make informed decisions about their health by providing the most reliable and up-to-date information about conditions, symptoms, treatment, prevention, and more. The purpose of medical review and medical fact-checking is to ensure that all content on Everyday Health is medically and pharmacologically accurate, and that all factual statements about medical procedures and tests, symptoms, treatments, standards of care, and typical protocols are correct and up to date. When addressing topics covered in this section, please reference the Everyday Health Framework and submit a document to the shared drive as outlined.

Corrections

A correction is published when there is a factual error in a story.When a correction is made online, the reporter is responsible for alerting homepage, social teams, etc., to make necessary changes.Corrections should be made directly in the article, and text added at the bottom of the page should clarify what has been corrected.When a correction is made, the last updated date on the article should only be changed if the article has been substantially modified or undergone another medical review.Corrections should be concise and make clear how and why the mistake has been corrected.Example correction: Earlier versions of this article incorrectly stated [an expert source’s title]. It should have read [corrected title]. Everyday Health regrets the error.

Takedown

In general, “unpublish” requests are not granted. If the subject is suspected of inaccuracy, the editor and reporter should investigate and, if necessary, publish a correction. There may be situations in which fairness demands an update or follow-up coverage. Consider whether further editorial action is warranted, but do not remove the article as though it was never published.

Social Media

In the event an error in fact or emphasis is disseminated via an Everyday Health social media account, the reporter should contact their editor immediately. If deemed appropriate, the editor may take down the offending post and republish a corrected version of the content along with a correction.

Does not repeatedly publish false contentGathers and presents information responsiblyRegularly corrects or clarifies errorsHandles the difference between news and opinion responsiblyAvoids deceptive headlinesWebsite discloses ownership and financingClearly labels advertisingReveals who’s in charge, including possible conflicts of interestThe site provides the names of content creators, along with either contact or biographical information

Read NewsGuard’s complete “Nutrition Label” review of EverydayHealth.com here. For inquiries related to general information or other matters, please visit our Contact Us page.