Nat Sec Press exists to publish work that improves understanding and decision-making in high-stakes environments. That mission requires clear editorial boundaries.
Below are the hard lines we will not cross—and the reasoning behind them.
1. Violent extremist–produced content
We do not publish material created by terrorist or violent extremist actors, including:
- Manifestos
- Propaganda or recruitment material
- Instructional or operational guidance
- Content whose primary value lies in reproduction rather than analysis
Why:
Responsible analysis does not require reproducing content that creates legal, ethical, or community risk.
Reproducing this material—even critically—can extend its reach, reinforce notoriety, and contribute to the very harms national security research seeks to mitigate.
In many jurisdictions, the possession, sharing, or republication of extremist material (even sharing links or screenshots of it) is illegal, irrespective of analytical intent.
2. Content that promotes, incites, or normalises violence or hatred
We will not publish material that legitimises, excuses, or normalises:
- Violence against individuals or groups
- Hatred, discrimination, or dehumanisation
- Calls for exclusion, harm, or retribution
Why:
Rigorous analysis is impartial in method, but not indifferent to harm.
Critical examination of violence and hatred does not depend on amplifying actors or material.
3. Material involving minors
We do not publish content that depicts minors in any context, including where age is unclear or unverifiable. This includes images, footage, transcripts, or other reproductions.
Analysis and commentary may address issues involving minors, but no visual, textual, or illustrative material depicting minors will be published under any circumstances.
Why:
This is a non-negotiable ethical, legal, and safeguarding standard.
If there is ambiguity, we err on the side of child protection.
4. Graphic or disturbing material beyond analytical necessity
We do not publish graphic imagery, footage, or descriptions where shock exceeds insight.
This includes content that could reasonably:
- Re-traumatise affected communities
- Create cumulative harm through exposure
- Substitutes visceral impact for analysis
Why:
Accuracy does not require graphic reproduction.
If a point cannot be made without disturbing detail, it usually has not yet been made well.
5. Material likely to re-victimise or target affected communities
We do not publish work that places the burden of harm management onto those already impacted, including:
- Poorly contextualised case material
- Content that treats lived harm as illustrative raw material
Why:
National security research has downstream effects on real people and communities.
Publication decisions must account for community protection, not assume resilience among those already impacted. That responsibility rests with authors and editors.
6. Unlawful or ethically compromised material
We do not publish material that is unlawful to possess, reproduce, or distribute, or that relies on:
- Illicitly obtained data
- Breaches of consent or confidentiality
- Misrepresentation of access, authority, or expertise
Why:
Methodological rigour includes ethical integrity.
Lawful conduct and ethical integrity are core publishing responsibilities. Material produced through unlawful or compromised means will not meet our editorial standards.
Authors that refuse to engage in editorial review
Nat Sec Press does not publish work where the author is unwilling to engage in good-faith editorial review, methodological transparency, or informed critique. Publishing without scrutiny undermines credibility, limits impact, and runs counter to our standards.
We do not publish work where an author rejects these conditions or treats scrutiny as illegitimate.
What does this mean for authors?
It means authors must take responsibility for the content they submit and engage in good-faith editorial review. Disclaimers or content warnings do not substitute for editorial judgement. Submissions should demonstrate intentional decisions about inclusion, necessity, and potential impact on audiences beyond the immediate readership.
This expectation is clearly communicated throughout the submission and review process. Entry into that process does not guarantee publication, and authors who do not engage in good-faith editorial review will not be published.
This is standard practice for publishing in a field with real-world consequences.
Editorial discretion
The above list is not exhaustive. Editorial discretion applies throughout the publishing process, including after commissioning. Nat Sec Press may decline or discontinue work that does not meet our editorial standards or that conflicts with our ethical, legal, or professional obligations, regardless of whether it falls within our publication scope or not.
Nat Sec Press takes its responsibility to publish responsibly seriously.
We actively consider the downstream effects of the work we commission and publish, including ethical, legal, and community impacts beyond the page. Editorial judgement is exercised intentionally, and publication is never automatic.
These standards reflect our commitment to credibility, to victims and affected communities, and to exercising careful, context-aware judgement in the complex and consequential national security environment.
