Editorial Policy

Effective: 24 October 2026 · Version: 2.2

Our principles

1. We do not copy the original

cont. editorial work does not reproduce the sentences, paragraphs or passages of the book, video or article it discusses. Where we quote directly, we quote briefly and only to support a specific point of commentary or criticism, with the source named.

As an internal editorial standard we keep direct quotation to short excerpts, and our house rule is to stay under roughly 25 words. That is our own working limit for keeping quotation genuinely incidental to commentary. It is not a legal threshold, and no word count creates or removes a right to quote.

2. What a lens actually is

A lens is our reading of a work, written independently. It sets out what we take the core argument to be, which parts hold up under scrutiny and which do not, what context you need to judge it, and whether the work is worth your full attention. It is commentary and criticism about a work, not a condensed edition of it.

On contested claims we argue both sides: the strongest case for the work's position and the sharpest critique of it. The point is to leave you with a view you can defend, not one you borrowed.

3. Not a replacement for the original

Our editorial work is designed to help you decide what to read, watch or listen to in full. It is not designed to substitute for the original, and we do not want it used that way. Every piece links back to the source and points you to official channels, whether that is a publisher, a bookseller, a library, the podcast's own host, or the creator's channel.

4. Our formats

We do not ingest, republish or paraphrase summaries from other summary services. Our editorial voice is our own, and our writers work from the source material.

5. Editorial standards

The cont. editorial team is responsible for the direction, framing and standards of our editorial work. Our focus is on what each piece offers the reader: useful context, a clear perspective and a route back to the original.

• Source first. We work from the original material and give readers enough context to understand the ideas being discussed
• Clear perspective. We distinguish the source's claims from our interpretation and make room for uncertainty and disagreement
• Care with detail. Names, quotations and factual claims should be faithful to their sources. Summaries and transcripts are reading aids; return to the original when a precise detail matters
• Accountability. We welcome questions and corrections, and take responsibility for addressing errors in our editorial content

6. Attribution

Every piece of editorial work identifies:

• The original author, publisher, creator or platform
• That the piece is editorial content written by cont., and is not affiliated with, endorsed by or sponsored by the author, publisher or creator
• A link to the original work

We do not use an author's name, likeness or branding in a way that implies they took part in, approved of, or endorsed our work.

7. Corrections

If we get something factually wrong, we fix it and note that we did. Tell us at [email protected]. Corrections to matters of fact are made promptly. Where our reading of a work is a matter of opinion, we will say so rather than quietly change our view.

8. Rights holders

If you are an author, publisher, creator or rights holder and you believe a piece of our editorial work goes beyond commentary and criticism, or you want a specific piece revised or removed, write to [email protected].

We respond within 72 hours and act on legitimate requests promptly. You do not need to send a formal legal notice to get our attention, though the full notice procedure is set out in section 7 of our Terms, along with the counter-notice process and our repeat infringer policy.

9. The legal framework we work within

Commentary and criticism about published works is recognised in copyright law, though the precise test differs by country and is ultimately decided case by case. We write with these frameworks in mind:

• United States. The fair use doctrine, 17 U.S.C. section 107, which weighs the purpose and character of the use, the nature of the work, how much is taken, and the effect on the market for the original
• European Union. The quotation, criticism and review exception in Article 5(3)(d) of Directive 2001/29/EC, as implemented in national law
• United Kingdom. Fair dealing for criticism and review, section 30 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988

Courts have recognised that uses which serve a different purpose from the original can be transformative. In Authors Guild v. Google, Inc., 804 F.3d 202 (2d Cir. 2015), the Second Circuit held that Google's search and snippet display of scanned books was a fair use, because it served a different informational purpose and did not substitute for the works. That case concerned search and snippets rather than editorial summary, so it is context for how transformative purpose is assessed, not a ruling about work like ours.

We design our editorial process around these principles: write independently, do not reproduce, serve a different purpose from the original, and point readers to the source rather than away from it. Whether any particular use qualifies is for a court to decide, and we do not claim otherwise. Where a rights holder disagrees with us, we would rather talk to them than litigate.

10. Wikipedia and Grokipedia

Wikipedia

Wikipedia overviews and article text appear in a custom reading view, with attribution, source and revision links, and a notice explaining presentation changes. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 licence. We credit Wikipedia contributors and retain that licence for adapted text. Images have their own credits, source links and licences.

Grokipedia

Where a topic also exists on Grokipedia, cont. offers a separate perspective through a verified link that opens the article on Grokipedia's own site.

We do not copy, host, mirror or republish Grokipedia's article text, and we make no licensing claim over it. When you follow the link, you leave cont. and Grokipedia's own terms apply.

Contact

Editorial questions and corrections: [email protected]. Rights holder matters: [email protected].