Editorial standards and code of ethics of “The Bridge of Friendship” media platform

Introduction

This document defines the principles that translate the philosophy of the Bulgarian-Romanian platform “The Bridge of Friendship” (friendshipbridge.eu) into daily journalistic practice. This media outlet strives to occupy a middle ground between the various hegemonic interests in Southeast Europe without becoming an exclusive mouthpiece for any of them. Instead, it strives to understand, interpret, and perhaps even encourage change in the region. And to navigate both the turbulent and the calm waters, it is guided by editorial standards that ensure its work with words, sound, and images is oriented toward independence, nuance, complexity, and the capacity for transformation.

1. Ownership, funding, and code of ethics

• Transparency (in line with article 6 of the European Media Freedom Act): You can read more about the transparency, ownership, and funding of “The Bridge of Friendship” here.
• Code of Ethics: We adhere to the Code of Ethics of Bulgarian Media as the professional foundation of our work.

2. Philosophy of “The Bridge of Friendship”

At the core of our editorial decisions lies the specific philosophy that Vladimir Mitev associates with the concept of “the friendship bridge.” You can read more about it here.

• Getting to Know the Other: The editorial team believes that the desire to communicate with the Other and the interest in getting to know them are signs of a healthy soul and are among the elements of a happy life. Unfortunately, in today’s world, Bulgarians and non-Bulgarians alike often believe that they are complete in terms of experience and knowledge and already know everything about everyone—that is, they are self-sufficient. Such thinking is a prerequisite for viewing the meaning of their lives through the accumulation of power over certain static experiences rather than through renewal and transformation. From the perspective of the Bridge of Friendship, the accumulation of power over some static experience leads to conflict, undermines social capital, and ends in fragmentation and exceptionalism. The Bridge of Friendship sees itself as the opposite of static identity and the accumulation of hegemony.
• Life as a collective creation: If the Other is a value, this requires empathy and the recognition that every citizen and societal subject—liberal, sovereignist, fundamentalist, leftist, rightist, or centrist—carries their own historical and existential truth. If the experience of every person or every trend is valid, the great battle is not to destroy the Other and their differing truth, but to be able to transform each of the poles in social polarization. The battle is not to dominate one another endlessly and to obstruct one another forever, but to be able to live and evolve together. That is why our region needs more cross-border media and more media bridges—by definition, cross-border media has one foot in the national conflicts of one country or another.
• Dynamic identity: “The Bridge of Friendship” not only reports facts, news, and events, but also strives in the long term to build a dynamic identity—in its online content, in its reader communities, and in the societies it connects. In this context, dynamic identity means mutual enrichment among the various participants in public life, as a result of which everyone continues to be themselves but becomes more aware that the people or forces they often struggle against—whether politically or personally—reflect realities within themselves. If this is true and is realized, it means that the person in question has become more aware of their shadow (according to Jung), has illuminated it, and has integrated it. 
• Change in the region: Southeast Europe will succeed in rising above its role as a fragmented periphery when it realizes that the fallen nature of the Balkans does not lie in our neighbors, but within ourselves. And for this reason, both we and our neighbors need to replace mutual obstruction in our relations with mutual support.
• Change depends on every individual: This grand transformation of the region cannot be achieved through social engineering. It can only be the result of a movement from the inside out in individuals and from the bottom up in societies.

3. Procedural rules: from philosophy to action

To ensure that “The Bridge of Friendship” remains true to its mission and professional standards, we apply the following operational protocols:

3.1. Defining genres

To avoid misleading the public, we clearly distinguish between different types of content:

• ​News/Report (informative text): Reflects events with factual accuracy. The language is descriptive and free of subjective judgment.
• ​Analysis: Explores causal links and context. Analysis is based on data and expertise, offering an interpretation without imposing a single truth.
• ​Opinion and commentary: Expresses the subjective position of the author or interviewee. These texts are explicitly marked to distinguish them from editorial content.
• Press release: An official informational document prepared by an organization, institution, or individual and sent to the media for the purpose of publicizing a news item, an event, or a specific position. Unlike journalistic material, a press release always presents a viewpoint that is in the source’s interest (i.e., it is a PR tool). At “The Friendship Bridge,” we use press releases and identify them as such because we wish to contribute to greater visibility for certain events and when specific positions or messages align with our philosophy.

3.2. Defending democratic dialogue (red lines)

​Although we strive to adopt a middle ground, to understand “the Other,” and to seek value in every position, we have reservations and red lines regarding:

• ​Authoritarian propaganda and disinformation: We strive to subject them to critical deconstruction in order to expose their mechanisms
• ​Hatred toward social groups socially constructed as vulnerable, and anti-democratic discourse: The platform strives not to reproduce or legitimize discourses that deny the dignity of the individual, stigmatize vulnerable categories of citizens, or incite violence. These phenomena represent a negation of the very idea of a bridge.

3.3. Conflicts of interest

• ​The existence of personal and group interests of the founder of the “Friendship Bridge”:
  • Vladimir Mitev is not a member and has never been a member of a political party, nor has he ever been a candidate for political office.
  • Currently, Vladimir Mitev is a member of two associations—the “Elias Canetti” International Society in Ruse, which is an NGO active in the fields of culture, civic education, memory politics, and democratic foundations, and the “Marginalia” Association, which is also active in the field of civic education and memory politics, but has a more pronounced interest in human rights issues, with topics such as the rise of the far right, the defense of the rights of various minorities, migrants, etc.
  • Vladimir Mitev was a member of the Supervisory Board of the non-governmental organization “Society of Friends of Persian Language and Culture in the Republic of Bulgaria,” which promotes cultural and academic ties between Bulgaria and Iran. This organization is currently inactive.
  • Vladimir Mitev holds shares on the Bulgarian Stock Exchange, but to date he has not written economic articles in the fields in which the companies whose shares he holds operate. If he writes articles on similar topics in the future, he will declare any financial interest in those companies.
• Conflict of interest regarding external authors: Currently, “The Bridge of Friendship” has a single external author—cultural editor Alexandru Ionașcu, who writes reviews on Romanian cinema and literature without declaring a conflict of interest
• Editorial independence: The publication of materials commissioned by and for entities with the aim of obtaining a direct economic or political benefit at the expense of objectivity is not permitted.

3.4. Working with sources and fact-checking

• ​Verification: Every factual claim is verified using primary sources (documents, official statistics, direct testimonies). In the case of controversial issues, at least two independent viewpoints are sought.
• ​Data transparency: We encourage the use of hyperlinks to original sources so that readers can trace the information’s path themselves.
• ​Anonymous sources: These are used exceptionally, only when the information is of high public interest and the source is in danger. The source’s identity must be known to the author to ensure its reliability.

3.5. Economic sovereignty and external funding

To avoid dependencies that would compromise the philosophy and practical actions of the media:

• Funding: The primary resource of the media remains the personal labor and assets of its founder.
• Donations and Advertising: Currently, “The Bridge of Friendship” does not publish advertisements and does not accept donations.
• ​Limits on influence: If “The Bridge of Friendship”’s revenue policy becomes more liberal in the future, no donor or advertiser will be able to influence editorial decisions. Accepting funds from entities with non-transparent origins or whose activities conflict with the project’s ethics will be prohibited.

4. Content selection criteria

To preserve the platform’s authenticity, the selection of topics and materials is based on the following criteria:

• Cross-border added value: Priority is given to topics that address the interaction between Bulgaria, Romania, and the region, or that offer a better understanding of phenomena in Bulgaria, Romania, or the region. Topics with pan-European relevance are also important, as is placing events from Southeast Europe in a broader European and global context.
• De-hegemonization of language: “The Bridge of Friendship” may publish articles that challenge or criticize elements of the national doctrines of Bulgaria, Romania, and the countries of the region, or that touch upon the sensitivities of their peoples—if it so chooses. What is unique, however, is that it sees itself as an intermediate and neutral territory that allows the various participants in given conflicts to express their positions and sensitivities without this being perceived as a threat by the other parties to the conflict. In other words, the “Bridge of Friendship” is a de-hegemonized space. It is precisely for this reason that it allows for a meeting of actors and forces that have accumulated significant hegemony, without this leading to escalation. On the contrary, communication through the Bridge of Friendship allows everyone to be heard in a situation where there may be strong ambitions to silence different voices.
• Expertise and nuance: We prefer in-depth analysis over superficial news. We focus on interviews with people who read and think before they speak. We strive to use our content to reveal the complexity of a given social problem or phenomenon, rather than simplifying it into convenient clichés and labels.

5. Procedures for preserving authenticity and fidelity to our philosophy

To ensure that the site remains true to its principles, we implement the following internal procedures:

• “Mediator” Editorial Filter: Before publication, every piece of content undergoes a review to assess its added value for the understanding of society in Bulgaria, Romania, and the region; of bilateral and regional relations; of the culture of Bulgarians, Romanians, and other peoples in the region; and so on.
• Financial sovereignty: The site’s revenue and funding sources (personal funds, dividends, etc.) must ensure editorial independence.
• Periodic self-reflection: In the medium and long term, the media outlet must be pluralistic in terms of the voices it gives a platform to.

6. Ethics in the use of artificial intelligence (AI)

In the era of digital transformation, “The Bridge of Friendship” employs AI as a progressive tool, adhering to strict guidelines:

• Human sovereignty: AI is used solely for technical optimization (translation of raw text, transcription, structuring, and summarizing articles). Every final editorial decision, nuance of thought, and authorial conclusion is the work of human intellect.
• Transparency: When we generate images or video using an AI-based platform, we disclose this to our audience.
• Protection against misinformation: We use AI tools for fact-checking, but never to generate non-existent events or fabricated quotes.

7. Feedback and dialogue mechanism

A bridge is a path that carries experience in both directions. Our authenticity is built through an active connection with our audience:

• Right to a Reasoned Response: The platform is open to the publication of opposing views and criticism, provided they maintain an ethical tone and contribute to understanding the topic.
• Corrections and transparency: Reports of factual errors are prioritized for verification. If an inaccuracy is found, the material is corrected. If the correction is significant, an explicit note from the editor describing the change is added.
• Direct contact: We maintain open channels of communication (contact form, social media) where any community member can suggest a topic or seek clarification on a published analysis.

Last updated: May 2026

Photo: The counci’s sqaure in Brashov (source: Pexels)