(Version française disponible ici.)
In October 2025, Policy Options published an article by a contributor identifying himself as Daniel Robson, who said he was an independent Canadian journalist from Montreal. Before publication, the writer pointed us to work published recently under that name in several Canadian media outlets. Those bylines – together with our extensive correspondence and his receptive attitude to detailed feedback and editing – gave us the confidence necessary to publish the article.
We no longer have that confidence and have removed the article and his biography along with their French translations. We have been unable to independently establish that the person who wrote for us is who he represents himself to be or that the biographical information he provided is accurate.
How we got here
On Sept. 7, I received an email from an editor based in Türkiye who had received a pitch from the writer. The editor asked if I could vouch for the Daniel Robson who had appeared in our pages. After reviewing our extensive correspondence with the author and his online profile, I realized I could not. This caused us to revisit the author’s work and reach out to him.
While the text of the article itself posed no apparent problems, we have made repeated efforts to independently verify the writer’s identity, expertise and the biographical information he provided.
The man who identified himself as Robson spoke with me by telephone on Sept. 14 but declined to provide verifiable details about his education, professional background or ties to Canada. He also declined my request for a video conversation, references or other information that would allow us to confirm his identity and professional background. The one Montreal educational institution he mentioned briefly during the conversation has no record of a Daniel Robson ever registering to study there. He initially agreed during our telephone conversation to provide a CV but subsequently declined to send it.
Robson told us that security concerns arising from his reporting make him unwilling to provide personal information. He says he has received threats connected to his work and has raised concerns about the motives and conduct of the editor whose inquiry prompted our review. We take his safety concerns and questions about the editor seriously.
I confirmed the identity and journalistic background of the editor who raised the concerns, but we are not relying solely on information received from him. What we’re sharing here is what we learned from our own work and our correspondence and conversations with the writer.
During my conversation with the writer, I offered to keep any information provided to us confidential and to use it only for the purpose of verifying his identity. To this point, however, he has refused.
There are other circumstances that, in hindsight, reinforce the decision to pull the article. In reviewing our correspondence and the six other submissions the writer sent us which we did not publish, we have identified signs of AI assistance throughout. Image-analysis tools raised questions about the veracity of the photograph he supplied to us. Last October, he also declined an honorarium we occasionally offer to journalists who write for us – an unusual step for an emerging independent journalist.
We should have undertaken more verification before publication. I relied too heavily on the fact that work under Daniel Robson’s name had already appeared in other Canadian publications – a form of trust cascade in which publication itself becomes a credential. We were also reassured by his co-operative response to extensive feedback and editing over nearly a month. I regret that I did not verify his identity and professional background more thoroughly before publishing his article and that our publication might have led others to trust his work.
Going forward
While we still strongly encourage first-time writers and other new voices to pitch commentaries to us, we are reviewing our procedures. We know more about AI today than we did a year ago. Going forward, when a writer lacks a substantial, independently verifiable professional record or appears to have relied heavily on AI tools, we will take additional steps to establish identity and relevant expertise. Failure to disclose AI use will result in articles not being published.
Nothing is more important to us than the trust of our readers. We have an obligation to take reasonable steps to ensure that the people we publish are who they represent themselves to be and have the background necessary to support the perspectives they offer. We promise to take greater care in the future.
