Our Team

Adsy Media is produced by a small team, and we would rather describe how the work is divided than pad this page with headshots. The masthead is short: several people carry more than one of the roles below, and the person editing a piece may also be chasing a source for it. What does not vary is the sequence every article passes through — a writer, a reviewer who did not write it, and an editor’s sign-off.

The editor

The editor decides what we publish and is accountable for it: commissioning against the beats, judging whether a story is worth a reader’s time, and killing pieces that do not survive reporting, including ones we have paid for. The editor sets the angle before work starts, edits for argument and structure rather than only prose, and asks the questions that decide whether a claim can run — what is the source, is it primary, who disputes it.

The editor also owns the calls readers most need someone answerable for: whether to grant a source anonymity, whether a conflict of interest disqualifies a writer, how a correction is categorised and worded, whether a piece is retracted, and the rare decision to unpublish. Requests for coverage from advertisers stop here; the answer is no. Labelling of sponsored content is the editor’s call, not the commercial side’s.

Beat writers

A beat writer owns a subject area over time rather than covering it once, because the value is accumulated knowledge: which programme changed its eligibility rules last year, which term is now standard in seed documents and which is a red flag. Beat writers keep source relationships, read the primary material as it lands — filings, specifications, changelogs, consultations, rulebooks — and build the spreadsheets and test rigs behind our worked-numbers pieces. They report the story, run the tests or the arithmetic, and submit the draft with its source file: every link, document, transcript and calculation mapped to the claim it supports.

The fact-checker and reviewer

Every piece is checked by someone who did not write it, working from that source file. It is the least visible role and the one that most determines whether the site can be trusted. The check works through the article claim by claim and confirms:

  1. Each factual sentence is genuinely supported by the source cited, not merely adjacent to it.
  2. Every number matches its source, and every calculation is re-run, with currency, units and period stated.
  3. Every link resolves to the specific document described rather than a homepage.
  4. Names, titles, company names, versions and jurisdictions are correct.
  5. Quotations match the transcript word for word and in context, and benchmarks carry their configuration.
  6. Time-sensitive claims are dated and hedged; contested claims meet the corroboration bar in our editorial guidelines, and any critical claim has been put to its subject for response.
  7. Nothing produced with an AI tool has slipped through unverified — every citation and figure is checked against the underlying source.
  8. The headline and any summary claim no more than the body proves.

Queries go back to the writer with a deadline; anything unsupported is cut, narrowed or attributed. The reviewer can hold a piece; only the editor can overrule that, and the reason is recorded.

The copy desk

The copy desk is the last read before publication. It handles house style, headline and subheading writing, paragraph-level structure, and the mechanics that signal whether a publication is careful: number formatting, code-block language and version labels, alt text, link text that says where it goes, and correct rendering of disclosure and correction notes. It also flags claims a reader could misread even when the underlying fact is right. If it cannot write a headline the body supports, the body goes back.

Freelance and guest contributors

Much of what we publish comes from practitioners who do not work here: engineers, founders, compliance leads and investors writing from direct experience, because someone who ran the migration or negotiated the terms can write things a general reporter cannot. Contributors work to the same rules as staff: commissions agreed in writing before work begins, the same review and copy desk stages, and fact-checking queries answered as part of the deal. Conflicts are declared at the pitch stage and disclosed on the article. Contributors may not add affiliate or paid links, and we accept no guest posts bought for backlinks. Terms are on write for us, and we read every pitch.

The standards every role is held to

All four roles work to one document: our editorial guidelines, covering sourcing, numbers and benchmarks, anonymity, the mandatory human verification behind any use of AI tools, plagiarism and attribution, disclosure of holdings in companies covered, sponsored and affiliate labelling, corrections and right of reply. Nobody publishes their own work unreviewed, and nobody on the commercial side edits, approves or previews copy. Every article carries a byline, and contributor bios are published with any disclosure a reader needs to weigh the piece. Corrections are marked on the page with a dated note.

Reaching the right person

Editorial matters — story tips, corrections, right-of-reply requests, questions for the editor — go to [email protected]. Pitches from writers go to [email protected]. Advertising and sponsorship enquiries go to [email protected], which no editorial decision passes through. Legal notices, DMCA correspondence and privacy requests go to [email protected]. Anything else goes to [email protected], or by phone at +1 604-850-8125 or post at 2090 Lonsdale Cres, Abbotsford, British Columbia V2T 1C4. Response times are on the contact page.