Insight processing reminder

Al-Akhbar is currently going through a transitional phase whereby the English website is available for Archival purposes only. All new content will be published in Arabic on the main website (www.al-akhbar.com).

Al-Akhbar Management

Date 2011-08-11 23:48:03
From [email protected]
To [email protected]
Others Listname: mailto:[email protected]
MessageId: <[email protected]>
InReplyTo: [email protected]
Text
Anyone sending insight through to the list needs to remember the new coding we have scoring everything on an A-F scale. I am pasting the directions again below. Pay particular attention to the directions under item credibility.

Also, Mikey made a good point the other day. Often we will task a source asking for feedback on a particular OS piece. When we do that please also include the piece being referenced so that it completes the insight. Sometimes we don't know what the source is referencing, making it confusing.

Finally, where possible its also a good idea to include the original (scrub them where needed) questions for the same reason mentioned above on the OS pieces. Where that is not possible and where necessary, please give a general idea on the tasking to better understand the sources references. Also, when you include the (scrubbed) questions - and again, I know that's not always appropriate - it helps others trying to learn the sourcing and insight process to learn how we task sources.

SOURCE: code
ATTRIBUTION: this is what we should say if we use this info in a publication, e.g. STRATFOR source/source in the medical industry/source on the ground, etc
SOURCE DESCRIPTION: this is where we put the more concrete details of the source for our internal consumption so we can better understand the source's background and ability to make the assessments in the insight. PUBLICATION: Yes or no. If you put yes it doesn't mean that we will publish it, but only that we can publish it.
SOURCE RELIABILITY: A-F. A being the best and F being the worst. This grades the source overall - access to information, timeliness, availability, etc. In short, how good is this source?
ITEM CREDIBILITY: A-F. A = we can take this info to the bank; B = Good insight but maybe not entirely precise; C = Insight is only partially true; D = There may be some interest in the insight, but it is mostly false or just pure speculation; F = Likely to be disinformation.
SPECIAL HANDLING: often this is "none" but it may be something like, "if you use this we need to be sure not to mention the part about XXX in thepublication" or any other special notes
SOURCE HANDLER: the person who can take follow-up questions and communicate with the source

Remember that you are not limited to only putting down the letter score and are encouraged to give insight into WHY you are picking that score. I know we are often in a hurry, but this is very helpful for everyone understanding biases, uniqueness and other factors that make the insight pertinent (or not).

If there are any questions, please ask.

Jen

--
Jennifer Richmond
STRATFOR
China Director
Director of International Projects
(512) 422-9335
[email protected]
www.stratfor.com

Comments

Post new comment

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><img><h1><h2><h3><h4><h5><h6><blockquote><span><aside>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

^ Back to Top