OPERATIONAL STANDARDS
THE SANKOFA QUESTION MAGAZINE | Mission Statement
The Sankofa Question operates as an investigative journalism platform examining knowledge production, discovery systems, and structural attribution patterns affecting Black communities across scientific and intellectual disciplines worldwide. We investigate claims made by corporations, government agencies, medical institutions, and academic bodies, and we hold them accountable for evidence-based representation.
Through accessible, evidence-based science journalism, we analyse systemic barriers in research funding, clinical trial participation, patent attribution, and editorial board governance. Our work empowers Black communities globally to engage critically with science, advocate for equitable policies, and demand transparency in who owns discovery.
We do not celebrate progress — we interrogate it. Each feature concludes with our signature framework, the Sankofa Question, which requires looking backward before moving forward. No data point escapes scrutiny. No policy remains unquestioned.
We illuminate institutional architecture, empower critical understanding, and advance accountability in science, technology, and innovation serving the African Diaspora from Africa to the Americas, Europe, the Caribbean, Oceania, and beyond.
Tagline: Evidence Before Assertion Subtitle: Critical Inquiry on Race, Equity, and Technology Focus Scope: Black Populations Worldwide
THE SANKOFA QUESTION MAGAZINE | Audience Statement
We connect with adults and young people in Black communities who want to understand the sciences shaping their lives. Our readers seek evidence-based analysis of how anti-Black racism intersects with health outcomes, environmental risk, technological access, and research opportunity. They recognise systemic inequities and gain the knowledge to advocate for inclusive and equitable scientific landscapes.
We value authentic stories grounded in primary data, analytical rigour, and a voice that speaks honestly about ongoing barriers and uncompromisingly about accountability. Our audience includes students, researchers, policymakers, journalists, advocates, parents, grandparents, and community members who want substantiated reporting and who hold powerful entities responsible for truthful scientific representation.
Through forensic attention, investigative features, and thoughtful analysis, we equip readers with the documentation they need to challenge inequitable structures and drive change in their communities. This publication serves the African Diaspora everywhere and works toward a future where science remains open, inclusive, and accountable to Black people.
Geographic Coverage: Africa (all regions); North America (United States, Canada); South America and the Caribbean; Europe (United Kingdom, France, Portugal, Netherlands, Germany); Oceania (Australia, New Zealand, Pacific Island nations); the Middle East (where significant Black communities exist).
Demographic Priority: Black scientists, scholars, families, practitioners, activists, and citizens seeking truth amid misinformation.
THE SANKOFA QUESTION MAGAZINE | Editorial Standards
This document outlines the principles and procedures guiding all content creation at The Sankofa Question. It establishes the framework for responsible journalism and sets clear expectations for contributors and readers alike.
Core Principles. We present scientifically accurate information based on peer-reviewed research and established consensus, reflecting science's ongoing revision. We contextualise every report within its social, historical, and political realities — moving beyond what occurred to why it happened and what follows. We amplify Black voices within STEM communities, particularly those historically marginalised across continents and colonial histories. We reject sensationalism and deploy respectful, inclusive language that affirms Black communities.
Fact-Checking Protocol. The editor holds ultimate responsibility for accuracy. As a solo operation, we build networks of trusted advisors for structured feedback. We prioritise peer-reviewed research, deploy secondary sources cautiously with clear identification, and draw verification from multiple independent sources wherever possible. Every claim is verified against original sources; complex or contentious topics receive expert consultation; we cross-reference information for consistency and bias; and errors surface through self-review, reader feedback, and consultation combined.
Error Resolution. When we identify errors, we revise immediately, publish clear explanations of why changes proved necessary, and apply the Corrections and Retractions Policy where retraction is warranted.
Commitment to Transparency. We practise ongoing self-reflection, actively build advisor networks, and communicate openly with readers about our processes and limitations. Trust builds through consistent honesty.
THE SANKOFA QUESTION MAGAZINE | Methodology & Investigative Framework
Our reporting sits at the intersection of investigative journalism and academic research. We examine the systems structuring knowledge production — citation networks, institutional funding flows, patent attribution patterns, and editorial governance hierarchies. Because we address recognition, authorship, and structural visibility, we disclose our methodology transparently.
Definition of Investigation. We examine primary documentation (archives, patents, court records); analyse quantitative datasets (demographics, funding allocations, publication metrics); review institutional histories and biographical archives; conduct direct interviews with documented sources; and perform comparative institutional benchmarking. We exclude anecdotal claims lacking supporting documentation.
Data Sources. We draw on peer-reviewed journals indexed in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science; university research archives; government research databases (NSF, NIH, UKRI, DST-Africa, among others); patent office records (USPTO, EPO, WIPO); institutional funding disclosures; and publicly available demographic surveys. We prefer original datasets over summarised secondary analyses.
Historical Attribution Review. We cross-reference multiple historical records to prevent single-source dependence, verify primary publication dates against earliest known citations, confirm affiliations through archival correspondence or contemporary directories, and annotate disputed claims explicitly rather than resolving them speculatively.
Counterargument Inclusion. Every investigative feature recognises competing scholarly interpretations, acknowledges institutional responses where publicly available, and distinguishes structural bias from intentional discrimination. Systemic outcomes differ fundamentally from individual intent, and we delineate those distinctions consistently.
Limitations. Demographic datasets carry classification inconsistencies across jurisdictions, historical records preserve privileged authors disproportionately, and institutional transparency varies dramatically by nation. We state documented limitations transparently within applicable articles.
Core Purpose. Not indictment — documentation. Not accusation — demonstration.
THE SANKOFA QUESTION MAGAZINE | Citation Style Standard
Official Standard. The Sankofa Question Magazine adopts the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 7th Edition (author–date format), as its official citation standard.
Why the Magazine Uses This Standard. APA suits this publication for four reasons. First, the author–date system signals currency: readers see immediately how recent each source is, which matters in equity-focused science reporting where data ages quickly. Second, APA handles empirical, data-driven work natively — funding figures, demographic breakdowns, and trial statistics sit at the centre of our investigations. Third, the format prevails across health sciences, psychology, and social science disciplines, aligning with our five content pillars. Fourth, author–date citations integrate cleanly into journalistic prose without fragmenting it with heavy footnotes, keeping our features readable for a broad audience.
Core Formats. Journal article: Author, A. A. (Year). Article title. Journal Name, Volume(Issue), pages. https://doi.org/xxxx Book: Author, A. A. (Year). Title of book. Publisher. Report: Institution. (Year). Report title (Report No. xx). Publisher. Web source: Organisation. (Year, Month Day). Page title. Site name. URL. Interview: Interviewee, I. I. (Year, Month Day). [Personal interview / Published transcript].
Source Hierarchy. 1) Primary archival documents (manuscripts, letters, patents); 2) peer-reviewed articles; 3) official government or institutional datasets; 4) academic monographs; 5) established news media reporting confirmed matters; 6) verified oral histories and community testimony.
Prohibited Practices. Wikipedia as a primary source; unsourced statistics; citation stacking of secondary summaries; ambiguous phrasing ("studies show"); unqualified personal blogs or preprints. Paraphrased ideas require citation; every figure displays "Source:" attribution beneath it.