1 Minute Signal provides high quality, efficient intelligence for builders. We monitor developments across artificial intelligence, software, technology, startups, and adjacent fields; identify the ideas most worth understanding; and turn them into concise, evidence-conscious analysis for readers who want signal without the noise.
We select consequential topics, assess the claims and evidence behind them, identify what is established and what remains uncertain, and take the analysis further: why it matters, what the implications and counterarguments are, who may be affected, and what readers can do with the information.
This policy describes the editorial standards that apply to everything we publish.
1. What We Publish
1.1 Signal Pages
Signal pages begin with a selected source, commonly a video, interview, presentation, podcast, or other substantive piece of media.
“The Case” concisely presents the source’s central claims and reasoning. It is intended to represent the source accurately, not to endorse its conclusions.
The sections that follow provide 1 Minute Signal’s independent analysis and editorial process. Depending on the subject, this may include:
- The most consequential insights and why they matter
- The strength and limitations of the supporting evidence
- Assumptions, unsupported assertions, hype, or disputed claims
- Relevant context omitted from the original source
- Counterarguments and competing interpretations
- Implications for different industries or stakeholders
- Practical next steps for readers
This analysis is designed to reflect 1 Minute Signal’s editorial framework, research, judgment, synthesis, and review.
1.2 Research Articles
Our research articles originate from continued monitoring of industry developments, recurring themes, unanswered questions, and emerging connections between events.
These articles develop an independent question, angle, or analytical framework and draw on multiple sources where appropriate. Unless an article explicitly says otherwise, our research articles are source-based analysis, not claims of firsthand reporting, private access, or original field research.
2. Editorial Standards
2.1 Accuracy and Context
We aim to publish accurate, useful, and appropriately contextualized information. We avoid sensational framing and do not present a development as more certain, novel, or consequential than the available evidence supports.
We distinguish among:
- Verified facts
- Claims made by a source
- Opinions and interpretations
- Predictions and extrapolations
- Disputed or unsettled questions
- Speculation
When a claim is uncertain, contested, or weakly supported, we aim to make that limitation clear.
2.2 Sources and Attribution
We cite and link sources so readers can examine the underlying evidence themselves.
We prefer primary sources when they are available and suitable, including research papers, official documentation, regulatory filings, company announcements, public datasets, technical specifications, and direct statements from the people or organizations involved.
Secondary sources may be used for context, independent reporting, expert interpretation, or subjects for which primary documentation is unavailable. We evaluate sources according to their relevance, proximity to the underlying facts, expertise, methodology, and record of reliability.
We attribute quotations and material ideas to their sources. We do not fabricate quotations, sources, data, or citations. We do not present transcript text as a verified quotation when its accuracy cannot be confirmed; when necessary, we paraphrase and attribute the underlying idea instead.
2.3 Fair Representation
When analyzing another person’s work, we try to represent the strongest reasonable version of the argument rather than attacking a weakened or distorted version.
Criticism should address the evidence, reasoning, assumptions, or implications of a claim. We aim to distinguish disagreement from factual error and skepticism from dismissal.
2.4 Technical Accuracy
Technology and AI coverage often involves incomplete information, rapidly changing systems, and claims that are difficult to verify independently. Our editorial review therefore pays particular attention to:
- Technical terminology
- Product and model capabilities
- Performance and benchmark claims
- Dates, figures, and comparisons
- Whether evidence supports the stated conclusion
- Whether a claim comes from an independent source or an interested party
- The difference between a demonstration, experiment, announced capability, and generally available product
Where an answer is genuinely unsettled, we would rather communicate uncertainty than manufacture confidence.
2.5 No Fabricated Experience or Reporting
We do not use AI—or any other method—to invent interviews, quotations, observations, personal experiences, or firsthand accounts.
An article will not imply that a writer attended an event, tested a product, interviewed a source, or personally witnessed something unless that actually occurred.
3. Editorial Process
Our editorial process combines human direction with AI-assisted research and production tools.
The process may include:
- Monitoring relevant publications, researchers, creators, companies, communities, and industry developments
- Identifying candidate sources, patterns, and emerging questions
- Evaluating a topic for relevance, quality, evidentiary value, and potential usefulness
- Researching the subject and locating supporting or contradictory sources
- Extracting and assessing the source’s central claims
- Developing the analysis, implications, counterarguments, and practical takeaways
- Reviewing attribution, citations, technical claims, and the distinction between fact and interpretation
- Approving, rejecting, revising, or withholding the article based on our editorial standards
- Conducting post-publication quality checks and making updates or corrections when warranted
All published content is produced under a human-directed editorial process. AI and automated systems may perform portions of the research, drafting, verification, and quality-review workflow, but final editorial authority and responsibility remain with 1 Minute Signal.
4. Use of AI
We use AI tools extensively and openly as part of our publishing workflow.
AI may assist with:
- Monitoring topics and identifying candidate developments
- Source discovery and research organization
- Transcript and document analysis
- Identifying central claims, contradictions, and missing context
- Proposing questions, connections, counterarguments, or analytical angles
- Drafting and revising article content
- Fact-checking support and citation review
- Technical and editorial quality checks
- Post-publication audits, including broken-link scans and source verification
AI may surface potential topics or analytical approaches, but it does not have final authority over what we cover, the position we take, or what gets published. Coverage priorities, editorial standards, publication criteria, and final decisions are determined by human editorial leadership.
AI output is not treated as a source of fact merely because an AI system produced it. Material claims should be grounded in attributable sources or clearly identified as analysis, inference, or speculation.
We do not use AI to fabricate quotations, invent sources, create false evidence, or present generated material as firsthand reporting from a real person.
Responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of everything published rests with 1 Minute Signal—not with an AI model, software provider, source, advertiser, or contributor.
5. Bylines and Accountability
5.1 1 Minute Signal Editorial Team
“1 Minute Signal Editorial Team” is our default organizational byline. It represents content produced through our collective editorial process, which may include source selection, research, AI-assisted drafting and analysis, automated quality controls, and human editorial oversight.
It is not a fictional individual or pen name. 1 Minute Signal takes editorial responsibility for everything published under this byline.
5.2 Andrew Gilbertson
Articles attributed to Andrew Gilbertson indicate substantial individual authorship, research, analysis, or editorial development by Andrew.
Andrew is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of 1 Minute Signal. He has more than 18 years of experience building and leading technology products, data and analytics systems, AI and machine-learning products, and startups. He co-founded and led product at Playback Rewards, spent nearly 14 years building products and data capabilities at PerBlue Entertainment, and created 1 Minute Signal as an independent technology and publishing venture.
Further information about editorial leadership and contributors is available on our Masthead.
6. Corrections and Updates
We correct factual errors promptly and transparently.
Substantive corrections are noted on the affected article and include the date of the change. A substantive correction may address:
- An incorrect fact, date, name, figure, or attribution
- A material sourcing problem
- A quotation or paraphrase that misrepresented the source
- Technically accurate wording that created a materially misleading impression
- New evidence that invalidates an important part of the original analysis
Minor spelling, grammar, formatting, and broken-link repairs may be made without a correction note when they do not alter the article’s meaning.
An update reflects relevant information that became available after publication. If an update substantially changes the article’s original conclusion, we treat it as a substantive correction or clearly explain the change.
Readers can report a potential error through our Corrections Policy.
7. Editorial Independence
Editorial decisions are made independently of advertisers, sponsors, commercial partners, affiliate relationships, and other outside parties.
Advertisers and sponsors do not determine which topics we cover or what conclusions we reach. Commercial considerations do not override our standards for accuracy, sourcing, relevance, and reader value.
Sponsored or paid content, if published, is clearly labeled. Material affiliate or commercial relationships are disclosed where they could reasonably affect a reader’s interpretation of the coverage.
8. Ownership
1 Minute Signal is published by Iron Rune Media, a publishing imprint of Iron Rune Technologies LLC.
Iron Rune Technologies LLC is independently owned. Editorial responsibility for 1 Minute Signal rests with its editorial leadership.
9. Copyright and Takedown Requests
We respect intellectual-property rights and aim to quote and reference third-party material only where appropriate and properly attributed.
Copyright owners can find instructions for submitting a formal notice on our DMCA Policy. Requests involving factual accuracy or editorial disagreement should instead be submitted through our Corrections Policy.
10. Contact
For questions about our editorial standards, source suggestions, corrections, or other editorial matters, please use our Contact page.
- Editorial team: Contact 1 Minute Signal
- Corrections: Corrections Policy
- Copyright notices: DMCA Policy
- Editorial leadership: Masthead