Editorial Policy

Blockfence started as a security company. Our team built tools that warn people before they sign a malicious transaction, and that work began after a friend with years of experience in crypto lost a six-figure sum to a single bad approval. We are now a crypto news publication, and we cover the whole of this industry rather than one corner of it. What carries over from our origins is a habit of skepticism: we check things before we believe them, and we report with our readers’ interests ahead of anyone else’s.

This policy explains how we decide what to publish, how we verify it, where our funding comes from, and what we do when we get something wrong. It applies to every reporter, editor, contributor, and freelancer who writes for blockfence.io, and to any work produced with the help of automated tools.

What we cover

We report on the digital asset industry across the board. That means markets and the forces that move them, protocols and DeFi, exchanges and the institutions moving into the space, regulation and enforcement, mining and infrastructure, stablecoins and tokenization, NFTs, and the culture and people around all of it. We also cover the technology underneath, from base layers to the applications built on top.

Security and fraud remain a strength of ours given where we came from, so expect sharp reporting on scams, phishing, wallet drainers, and exploit post-mortems alongside everything else. But that is one beat among many, not the whole publication. We are not a tip sheet. We do not tell people which tokens to buy, and we treat coverage of any single project as reporting rather than promotion.

How we report

Speed matters in this industry, but being right matters more. We would rather publish a story ten minutes late than print a claim we cannot stand behind.

Before an article goes live, we check it against primary sources wherever they exist: on-chain data, official statements, regulatory filings, signed messages, court documents, and source code. Unverified claims need more than one independent source before we report them as fact, and a single anonymous account is not enough on its own. When a story is still moving and the facts are not settled, we label it as developing and update it as we confirm more. Our headlines describe what the article actually says. We do not write a headline the body cannot support.

Reporting on scams, exploits, and active threats

Covering security comes with a duty not to make things worse, and it is a duty we take seriously. When we report on a live exploit or a flaw that has not been patched, we weigh the public’s need to know against the risk of handing attackers a manual. We do not publish step-by-step detail that would let someone repeat an attack while funds are still exposed. Where a vulnerability is still being fixed, we may hold specifics or coordinate timing with the affected team, but we never let a project edit our findings or talk us out of a story.

We do not name individual victims unless they have chosen to speak publicly. And we report on a scam or a bad actor regardless of who is behind it, including projects that advertise with us or partner with us.

Editorial independence

We do not sell coverage. You cannot pay us to write a favorable article, to soften a critical one, to move up our news feed, or to take a story down. Coverage decisions belong to the newsroom and are based on news value alone.

Press releases are not news. If a release leads to an article, it is because we judged the underlying development worth covering and reported it ourselves, with our own sourcing and our own questions.

Conflicts of interest

Blockfence has roots in crypto security, and we still maintain products and partnerships from that work. When a story touches one of our own products, a competing tool, or a partner, we say so in the article so you can weigh the coverage for yourself.

Our writers and editors disclose any material holding in an asset they cover, and they step away from covering tokens in which they hold a position that could sway their judgment. The newsroom does not take direction from the company’s sales, marketing, or partnerships teams.

Sponsored content and advertising

Advertising and sponsored posts help keep our reporting free to read. Anything paid for is labeled in plain language as Sponsored or Advertisement and is styled so you can tell it apart from our journalism at a glance. Advertisers have no say over our editorial coverage, and buying space here does not shield anyone from scrutiny. We turn down paid placements for projects we believe are deceptive or built to defraud, whatever the fee on the table.

Opinion, analysis, and news

We keep straight reporting separate from analysis and opinion, and we label the latter two clearly. An opinion piece reflects the views of its author, not a house position, and is marked as such at the top of the page.

Sourcing and attribution

Our content is original. We do not lift another outlet’s reporting and repackage it as our own. When we build on work first published elsewhere, we credit that outlet by name and link to it. Quotes are attributed to the people who said them. Data, charts, and images are credited to their owners, and we respect copyright in everything we run.

Corrections

We will make mistakes, because the work is fast and the ground keeps shifting. When we do, we fix them in the open. A material error is corrected in the article itself, with a short note explaining what changed and when. If you spot something wrong, tell us and we will look into it.

Not financial advice

Nothing we publish is financial, legal, or investment advice. Crypto carries real risk, and prices, projects, and protocols can fail without warning. Do your own research, verify details yourself, and treat our coverage as information to inform your decisions rather than a recommendation to act on them.

Contact

For tips, corrections, or feedback on our reporting, reach the editorial team at [email protected].