In a collection effort, specific and neutral terminology refers to language that objectively reflects the content and context in which the audio data was collected without the imposition of opinion or bias. For example:
- In describing the nature of the sounds captured in the audio data, an example of neutral wording would be ‘a loud, short sound, possibly a gunshot’, compared to the non-neutral description of ‘the sound of a gunshot’;
- In describing the alleged crime(s) captured in the audio data, an example of neutral wording would be ‘a possible authorisation of a missile strike’, compared to the non-neutral ‘authorisation of a missile strike’;
- In describing the context of the audio data collection, an example of neutral wording would be ‘a gathering of approximately 100 people in the street’, compared to the non-neutral ‘a large political demonstration’;
- In describing the actors involved in the alleged crime(s) captured in the audio data, an example of neutral wording would be ‘a group of armed individuals’, compared to the non-neutral ‘the terrorist group’.
Appropriate and neutral terminology also manages expectations regarding the ultimate use of the data. For example, collected data should not be labelled ‘evidence’ unless it has been tendered as evidence before an accountability mechanism to prove a fact in question. Rather, it should be referred to as ‘potential evidence’, ‘data’, or ‘information’, which accurately reflects the fact that not all collected data will be relied on as evidence.
Appropriate and neutral terminology should be used with consistency and without exception throughout the collection effort and by all personnel, e.g., when documenting the collection effort (see BP 3); when labelling audio data files or the content within the files (see BP 11) and in both internal communication among personnel and external communication with third parties. The Collector should consider establishing a list of appropriate and neutral terminology that is relevant to the context of the collection effort. This list should be clearly defined in the Collection Plan (see BP 6).
Tech Specs & Resources
For terminology distinctions, see PILPG, Handbook on Civil Society Documentation of Serious Human Rights Violations: Principles and Best Practices (2016), pages 15-18.
For neutral language relevant to open-source investigations, see GLAN/Bellingcat, Methodology for Online Open Source Investigations into Incidents Taking Place in Ukraine since 2022 (2022), Annex VII: Style Guide and Naming Conventions, page 75.
Legal Framework
See section 4.3. on the presumption of innocence as an element of the right to a fair trial.
Applicable Ethical Principles Accuracy, Impartiality, and Objectivity.