About Grade One Press, and why there is no author name
Grade One Press reports on technology and the industry built on it, and it asks to be checked rather than trusted. It is also a name that does not belong to a person, and you are entitled to be suspicious of that. A publication that tells you to ask who benefits from a claim should expect the same question itself.
What you can check instead of a byline
Every story links to the document it rests on: the filing, the ruling, the release or the paper, not another outlet’s account of it. Beside each source is the date it was read and a grade for how much weight it can bear, and each story says what its evidence does not tell you. When something turns out to be wrong, the correction is dated and printed above the story it corrects, at the same address.
Nobody pays for any of it to be written. There is no commission, no sponsor and no client. None of the organisations reported on has any relationship to the publication; none is approached for approval, and none can buy a mention. There are no ads, no affiliate links, no referral codes and no paid placements, so nothing here earns money if you click it, sign up for it or buy it.
You do lose something by not having a name to look up: you cannot judge the work by the reputation of whoever wrote it. What stands in its place is the evidence, attached to every story, and a record of every correction.
Check the story, not the author. The standard sets out how every source is graded, so you can grade them yourself.
Why there is no name
The reason is fairly ordinary. Reporting that often concludes a claim does not hold up, including claims made by people with something to sell, is easier to keep straight when there is no career behind it waiting to be damaged, and no personal brand for it to promote.
The desks sign the work instead: the Newsroom for news, Research for reports and the research projects.
Why “Grade One Press”
The name is deliberately empty of claims. It is not an institute or a council or a society, none of which this is, and it is not a person’s name either, so nobody should come away with a wrong idea about who writes it.
It does mean something, and it is checkable rather than decorative. A grade 1 source is a body with the power to compel an answer and nothing to sell you: a regulator, a court, a statistics office. It is the top of the five-grade scale every source published here is measured against. The name is a statement about method rather than about standing.
How it is paid for
By its readers. Reading is free, and needs no account and no email address: the news, the brief, the reports, the data and the weekly newsletter stay free for everybody.
Two things are sold. A membership brings The Fine Print, a weekly email that checks the week’s most repeated technology claims against the documents they came from; it is the one thing here only members get. And the first book of the research, Computing Careers 2026, is sold on its own.
No advertiser, sponsor or client pays for anything here, and the site runs no analytics. The privacy section says exactly what little is kept.
How to argue with it
Every story shows its sources and their grades, so what you can disagree with is the reasoning, not a conclusion you are asked to take on trust. The research’s evidence is free to download under CC BY 4.0.
If something here is wrong, send it. This has already happened, on one of the most quoted numbers in the field: a reader noticed that two figures printed on the same page could not both be true, and was right. The page was not taken down. The correction and the primary source it was settled against are set out at the address that carried the error.
The first book
The research’s first project, Computing Careers, produced a book: a method for judging any computing career, and forty-six worked examples of it. Its first part, on telling a real number from a marketing number, is free to read. What the book is, and what it is not, is on its own page.