Close to the industry. Independent in our judgement.
SALT. covers an industry we believe deserves more attention, better understanding and more ambitious storytelling.
We recognise the importance of seafood to global food security, local economies, scientific innovation and coastal livelihoods. We also believe these contributions can and should be examined alongside the environmental, social and economic challenges facing the sector.
Where we stand.
SALT. is a publication with a clear position. We are close to the seafood industry, and we support the coexistence of aquaculture and wild fisheries as complementary ways of putting seafood on the table.
We say this openly so that readers can judge our work with it in mind. Our independence is not neutrality. It means that no company, association or campaign decides what we publish, and that we follow the evidence even when it is uncomfortable for the industry we support.
Independence matters.
Our editorial work is guided by relevance, evidence and the interests of our readers.
We aim to distinguish reporting from opinion, commercial communications and material supplied by organisations with an interest in the outcome of a story.
Companies, industry associations, campaign groups and public authorities can all provide valuable information. None should be treated as an unquestionable source of truth.
We evaluate claims according to the evidence available, regardless of who makes them.
A relationship with the industry, not a free pass.
We welcome expertise and insight from people working across fisheries, aquaculture, seafood processing, science, retail and other connected sectors.
We believe people working within these industries often have knowledge that is missing from public conversations.
That expertise deserves to be heard. It also deserves scrutiny.
Commercial relationships, sponsorships or partnerships, where applicable, should be clearly distinguished from independent editorial coverage.
Transparency with our readers.
We believe readers should be able to understand where important information comes from, when a story was published or updated and whether a relevant commercial relationship exists.
When we make mistakes, we should correct them.
When the evidence changes, our coverage should reflect that.
And when a story is more complicated than the competing sides suggest, we won't pretend otherwise simply to make it easier to tell.