About us

Welcome to NationalWorld, a national news brand for all of the UK .

Who we are

Launched in 2021, NationalWorld is produced by a team of journalists, editors, producers and designers who live and work across the UK. As such, we don’t report on the news through a London lens. Instead, we endeavour to shift the focus to the people, places and perspectives which are still too often underreported and underrepresented.

Our mission is to provide incisive, informed and intelligent coverage of the issues that matter to you. We always strive to hold power to account, and highlight injustice and hypocrisy wherever we find it.

We also call for a fairer distribution of political power, jobs and culture across the UK. We produce regular investigations that unearth exclusive stories of national significance, wherever we see inequality or corruption.

We are owned by National World plc, one of the UK’s leading media organisations.

With a team that includes specialists in national and international news and sport, data journalism, investigations and video, we cover the issues we believe our readers are genuinely passionate about, from the housing crisis to women’s safety.

Every day we also share the best offbeat and uplifting stories from around the world, capturing the zeitgeist of the top TV shows, games and social media trends.

Our editors and reporters have been nominated and won a range of accolades for their work, including at the British Journalism Awards, Media Freedom Awards, News Awards, Scottish Press Awards, Publisher Podcast Awards, Royal Statistical Society Awards and the AOP Awards.

You can sign up for one of our daily or weekly newsletters , and join us on Facebook , Twitter , Instagram , Youtube , LinkedIn or TikTok .

If you have any feedback, you can find out who to get in touch with on our Contact page .

Our editorial code of practice

This code is determined by the Editor, in consultation with senior editors and journalists, and is subject to change. Our editors and journalists are expected to uphold the highest professional standards, including adhering to IPSO's Editors' Code of Practice .


We take all reasonable steps to verify information is correct before publication. When alerted to errors, we should correct the record promptly and transparently (see ‘Corrections’).


If we report a claim about something or someone we always attribute it to a source. Any time a piece of information in our work comes from a source and not from our own firsthand observations or knowledge, it must be attributed. If we cannot find a source, then we will not include the claim. We always endeavour to include on-the-record comments from a named source, but we recognise that there are perfectly valid reasons why a source would prefer to remain anonymous and off-the-record, and we judge this on a case-by-case basis.


We strive to represent all significant sides to a story, to give our audience a balanced picture. However, we must be aware that striving for ‘balance’ does not compromise accuracy or fairness.


We are politically non-partisan and independent, and we will take care not to allow perceptions of bias in our reporting. Holding the government of the day to account should not be mistaken for bias.


We will always be transparent about who has contributed original material to the story, and add bylines as standard.


We may occasionally choose to advocate for social or political change, or raise funds for a cause, when such campaigns support freedom of speech or human rights, are in the best interests of our audience, or contribute to making our country a better place.


We endeavour to use plain, direct language, and we strive to state the facts in the clearest possible manner. We will be diligent in busting jargon, double-speak and obfuscatory language that hides true meaning.

Climate Change

We recognise the overwhelming scientific consensus that climate change is real and caused by human activity. We welcome robust debate about the appropriate response to climate change, but will not provide a platform for denialism or hoax advocacy in our reporting or commentary.


We respect the principle of copyright and abide by relevant legislation, and any relevant industry agreements. Permission will be sought before using copyright material, and it should be clearly credited to the copyright holder.


Errors must be addressed with prompt corrections that explain the error without continuing to perpetuate it. For more serious errors, an apology may be appropriate. When a substantive correction is made to a story, a postscript labeled ‘Correction’ should be added to the foot of the online story explaining the change. When a contested point is largely correct but the manner of expression makes it liable to misinterpretation, a ‘Clarification’ may be published in the same format as a correction.


We take great care with any stories based on data, ensuring that the underlying research is robust, that the sample size is sufficient and the source is reliable. All such stories are checked by our Data and Investigations team, who ensure it meets our standards.

Diversity, discrimination and prejudice

We aim to fairly represent the diversity of the UK in our journalism. We will do this through our story selection, as well as a thorough approach to highlighting a broad range of perspectives, and actively committing to an inclusive editorial recruitment policy. We should not publish pejorative or prejudiced material based on ethnicity, gender, age, religion, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, physical appearance or ability, social status or illness. Neither should those factors be unduly emphasised in stories unless they are genuinely relevant.


Interviews should be conducted in person, by phone, or by video call. On rare occasions, interviews can be conducted by email or chat/messaging app if the interviewee is unavailable to speak. When dealing with organisations, an interview is strongly preferred over written statements. When comment is provided through a statement rather than an interview, that should be noted in the story. When individuals or organisations decline to comment, that should be noted in a story, and when salient questions are unanswered it may be appropriate to note the questions in the story. Journalists should not share questions with interviewees before an interview, though it may sometimes be appropriate to provide broad outlines of the topics for discussion. Interviews conducted by journalists are assumed to be on the record and able to be reported unless otherwise specified. Interviewees cannot retrospectively put interviews off the record. We will never pay interview subjects.

Opinion and commentary

We will endeavour to publish material representing a diverse range of opinions. Such opinions represent the views of the individual authors; not the views of the publication. Authors of news stories will avoid expressing opinions or “editorialising” within those stories. We draw a clear distinction between comment and news.

Photography and videos

Journalists must not alter photographs or videos to distort and/or misrepresent the image – except for purely cosmetic reasons – without informing the reader what has occurred and why. If there is a legal reason to hide someone’s identity, this can be done by blurring or pixelating images.

Plagiarism and attribution

We value originality in journalism, and deliberate plagiarism is strictly forbidden. When referencing material from another source – such as reports, studies or stories from other media organisations – journalists should clearly credit the originating party, and link to the source where possible.


Words presented between quote marks should be verbatim as said by the interviewee, with the exception that some idiosyncrasies of speech – such as the word “um” – may be removed for clarity.

Right of reply

Any subject of a news story who is facing criticism or allegations must be afforded reasonable right of reply before publication. Journalists must make every reasonable effort to reach the subject of a story to extend them right of reply. They must be given a fair summary of the allegations against them, and enough time to respond. The response time allowed will vary depending on the nature of the story and production requirements. On rare occasions when it is not practical to seek comment before content is published, the right of reply should be offered as soon as possible afterwards and the subject’s response published either in an update or a new story.


Individuals featured in stories should be quoted under their real name unless there are compelling reasons for confidentiality and it is in the public interest that their comments be reported. While confidential sources are valuable in some cases, overuse of anonymity undermines trust because readers are unable to evaluate the credibility of an interviewee. If a source is reported under a made-up name, this must be clearly disclosed. Journalists must act with integrity and preserve their sources. When we accept information from a confidential source, we must protect their identity.


Journalists should not use deception to get information unless a story has genuine public interest value and the information cannot be obtained another way. Subterfuge includes failing to identify oneself as a journalist, adopting a fake identity, and using hidden devices to make recordings for publication. In circumstances where subterfuge is considered necessary, approval must be secured from a senior editor.


Journalists must adhere to the IPSO guidance on reporting suicide , and must include references to suicide being preventable and signpost sources of support, such as Samaritans


Journalists must take all reasonable and practicable steps to satisfy themselves of the veracity of a witness account or piece of media before publishing.