Faber & Faber

https://www.faber.co.uk · 34/92 checks passed · publishers

Compliance report (framework 0.8)

Gate passed (every Core check must pass) · not counted towards the gate: paused 35, draft 48, ready for review 54.

Site level: 0 (no scored checks yet).

By level

LevelResult
Level 1 — Basic 17/37 (20 failed)
Level 2 — Enhanced 10/27 (17 failed)
Level 3 — Advanced 0/10 (9 failed)

By category

CategoryResult
Accessibility 5/13
Accountability 0/5
AI & Automation 3/8
Interoperability 1/3
Privacy 5/16
Provenance 1/2
Security 6/11
Transparency 6/13
Responsibility to the Future 0/3

Level 1 — Basic

Accessibility

FAIL Text alternatives for images
  • 5 images missing alt attribute: data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%20viewBox='0%200%200%200'%3E%3C/svg%3E, data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%20viewBox='0%200%200%200'%3E%3C/svg%3E, data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%20viewBox='0%200%200%200'%3E%3C/svg%3E, data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%20viewBox='0%200%200%200'%3E%3C/svg%3E, data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%20viewBox='0%200%200%200'%3E%3C/svg%3E.
FAIL Decorative images properly marked
  • 5 images missing alt attribute: data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%20viewBox='0%200%200%200'%3E%3C/svg%3E, data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%20viewBox='0%200%200%200'%3E%3C/svg%3E, data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%20viewBox='0%200%200%200'%3E%3C/svg%3E, data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%20viewBox='0%200%200%200'%3E%3C/svg%3E, data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg%20xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%20viewBox='0%200%200%200'%3E%3C/svg%3E.
FAIL Proper heading hierarchy
  • Heading hierarchy issues: h2 -> h4 (skipped h3); h2 -> h4 (skipped h3); h2 -> h4 (skipped h3).

AI & Automation

FAIL AI use policy in place
  • scope_clear: The statement mentions being 'mindful' and 'considering where the technology might be used constructively' but does not specify what AI is actually used for.
    Fix: Add specific examples of current or intended AI use cases (e.g., editorial, marketing, translation) so readers understand the concrete scope.

Privacy

FAIL No fingerprinting script patterns
  • 2 inline scripts matched a tracker/ad pattern; first match: ' fbq('init', '432776302759217', {}, { "agent": "woocommerce_0-10.4.3-3.…'.

Security

Transparency

FAIL Funding/sponsorship disclosure
  • disclosure_exists: The About page contains no funding or sponsorship disclosure, only descriptions of partnerships and prizes.
    Fix: Add a dedicated funding/sponsorship disclosure section on the About page identifying any financial backers, investors, or sponsors.
  • transparent: No funding sources are identified anywhere on the page.
    Fix: Clearly name all funders, owners, and sponsors (e.g., shareholders, grant-makers, prize sponsors) with a transparent statement of their relationship to Faber.

Level 2 — Enhanced

Accessibility

Accountability

FAIL Named responsible person
  • named_person: The page lists only generic departments and email aliases (e.g., Trade Sales, Press & Publicity) with one exception (brittany.dennison for US Press), but no named individual or clearly defined role-holder is identified as responsible overall.
    Fix: Add a named person or specific role title (e.g., Head of Customer Services) as the accountable contact for general enquiries.
FAIL Published response timeframes
  • response_timeframe: The contact page lists many email addresses and postal routes but does not publish any response timeframe for inquiries.
    Fix: Add a stated response timeframe (e.g., 'we aim to respond within 5 business days') for each contact channel on the Contact Us page.
  • specific: Because no timeframes are published at all, there are no specific day/hour commitments on the page.
    Fix: Publish specific response windows in concrete units (e.g., 'within 3 working days') alongside each contact method rather than vague language.
FAIL Documented complaints process
  • process_exists: The page provides contact details for departments but does not document any complaints or feedback process.
    Fix: Add a dedicated complaints/feedback section (or link to a complaints policy) describing how users can raise, escalate, and resolve issues.
  • steps_clear: With no complaints process documented, there are no steps described for users to follow when making a complaint.
    Fix: Publish clear numbered steps (how to submit, what information to include, who reviews it, and escalation path) for making a complaint.
FAIL Clear appeals process
  • appeals_exists: The contact page lists various departmental emails and addresses but does not document any appeals process for decisions or complaints.
    Fix: Add a dedicated section outlining how users can formally appeal or complain about decisions, including steps, timelines, and contact details.
  • independent: No appeals process is described, so there is no indication of independent review or escalation path.
    Fix: Document an escalation route to an independent reviewer or senior/ombudsperson for unresolved appeals, distinct from the original decision-maker.

AI & Automation

FAIL Published AI use policy (detailed)
  • detailed_scope: The AI section is high-level and does not detail specific AI applications, tools, or workflows at Faber.
    Fix: Expand the policy to enumerate concrete AI use cases, systems used, and areas explicitly excluded from AI involvement.
  • limitations: While environmental and ethical costs are mentioned, the page does not acknowledge specific limitations of AI systems such as inaccuracy, bias, or hallucination.
    Fix: Add a paragraph acknowledging known AI limitations (e.g., factual errors, bias, IP concerns) that inform Faber's cautious approach.
  • safeguards: The policy references a 'careful approach' but does not describe any concrete safeguards, review processes, or quality controls.
    Fix: Describe specific safeguards such as human review requirements, author consent policies, or governance procedures used when AI is involved.
FAIL AI-assisted content clearly marked
  • marking_policy: The AI section states a careful approach but does not describe any policy for marking or labeling AI-assisted content.
    Fix: Add an explicit policy stating how AI-assisted content (text, images, translations) will be labeled or disclosed to readers.
  • consistent: Without a stated marking policy, there is no evidence that AI content marking is applied consistently across Faber's outputs.
    Fix: Publish clear labeling conventions and commit to applying them consistently across all books, marketing, and web content that involves AI.
FAIL Human oversight of AI documented
  • oversight_exists: The AI statement mentions being 'mindful' and 'careful' but does not document any human oversight mechanism for AI outputs.
    Fix: Document specific human oversight procedures (e.g., editorial review of any AI-assisted material) on the AI page.
  • review_process: No review or approval workflow for AI-generated content is described on the page.
    Fix: Describe the review/approval steps AI-assisted outputs must pass through before publication, including who signs them off.
  • accountability: No individual, role, or team is named as accountable for AI-generated content at Faber.
    Fix: Name a responsible role or contact (e.g., an editorial director or AI governance lead) accountable for AI-related decisions and outputs.

Interoperability

Privacy

FAIL Data collection limited to necessity
  • necessity: The policy does not explicitly state that data collection is limited to what is necessary (no data minimisation statement is made).
    Fix: Add an explicit data minimisation statement confirming that Faber only collects personal data that is necessary for the specified purposes.
FAIL No dark patterns in consent flows
  • equal_choices: The policy page shows no consent interface with accept/reject options, so equal prominence of choices cannot be demonstrated.
    Fix: Implement a visible consent banner or preference center where 'Reject' is given equal visual weight and prominence as 'Accept'.
FAIL Cookie banner partner disclosure
  • partner_sharing_mentioned: The banner only mentions personalising experience and book recommendations, with no disclosure of data sharing with third-party partners.
    Fix: Update the banner copy to explicitly state whether and how user data is shared with third-party partners, with a link to a detailed partner list.
  • partner_count_specific: No numeric count of partners is stated since partner sharing is not disclosed at all.
    Fix: Include a specific number of third-party partners (e.g., 'We share data with X partners') directly in the consent interface.

Provenance

Security

Transparency

FAIL Funding disclosed with detail
  • detail: No funding figures, percentages, or categories are provided on the page.
    Fix: Publish meaningful funding detail such as revenue categories, ownership percentages, or sponsor contribution amounts.
  • complete: Since no disclosure exists, major funding streams are not covered.
    Fix: Provide a complete breakdown covering all major funding streams including book sales, subscriptions, academy revenue, partnership income, and any external sponsorships or grants.
FAIL Governance structure disclosed
  • governance_exists: The page describes Faber's history, partnerships, prizes, and AI stance but does not outline any governance or editorial structure.
    Fix: Add a section describing the company's governance or editorial structure, such as board composition, editorial oversight, or decision-making processes.
  • roles_clear: Apart from a historical mention of T. S. Eliot as the first Poetry Editor, no current key roles or responsibilities (e.g., CEO, editorial directors) are identified.
    Fix: Include a list or section identifying current leadership and key editorial roles with their responsibilities, possibly linking to a team or leadership page.
FAIL Algorithm explanation if applicable
  • algorithm_explained: The AI section vaguely says Faber is 'considering where the technology might be used constructively' but does not explain the purpose of any specific algorithm in use.
    Fix: Add a clear statement describing any algorithms or AI systems currently used (e.g., for recommendations, editorial selection, or marketing) and their specific purpose.
  • impact_clear: The page does not describe how algorithmic decisions affect users such as authors, readers, or members.
    Fix: Include a section explaining how any algorithmic or AI-driven decisions impact users, e.g., effect on book recommendations, submissions review, or content shown to members.
FAIL Annual data practices statement
  • annual_statement: The page links to a Privacy Policy and Cookie Policy but provides no evidence of regular or annual review of data practices.
    Fix: Add a statement to the Privacy Policy indicating when it was last reviewed and committing to periodic (e.g., annual) reviews of data practices.
  • dated: There is no visible date or version indicator for the privacy/data practices statement on this page, only a generic '© Faber 2021' footer.
    Fix: Include a 'Last updated' date or version number on the Privacy Policy and reference it where data practices are mentioned.

Level 3 — Advanced

Accessibility

FAIL Published accessibility statement
  • statement_exists: The page only shows a 'Building Accessibility' link in the footer, which refers to physical premises, and there is no dedicated digital accessibility statement present.
    Fix: Create a dedicated accessibility statement page covering the website's conformance with WCAG standards and link to it clearly from the footer.
  • known_issues: No accessibility statement exists on the page, so no known accessibility issues or limitations are acknowledged.
    Fix: Include a section in the accessibility statement that lists known accessibility barriers and areas of non-compliance.
  • remediation_timeline: There is no accessibility statement and therefore no timeline or commitment for resolving accessibility issues.
    Fix: Add a remediation timeline to the accessibility statement specifying target dates for fixing identified issues.
  • feedback_channel: While a general 'Contact Us' link exists, there is no accessibility-specific feedback mechanism with a stated response commitment.
    Fix: Provide a dedicated accessibility feedback contact (email or form) in the statement along with a committed response timeframe.

Accountability

FAIL Published moderation policies
  • enforcement: Section 4.4 only vaguely states Faber 'will take any action we think is necessary' including suspension or termination, without describing the review, notice, or appeal process.
    Fix: Add a clear enforcement procedure explaining how violations are reviewed, how users are notified of actions taken, and whether/how they can appeal a suspension or termination.

Interoperability

Security

FAIL Incident response plan published
  • plan_exists: The About page contains no published incident response plan or security policy, only company history, partnerships, prizes and an AI statement.
    Fix: Publish an incident response plan or security policy page and link to it from the site footer alongside the Privacy and Cookie policies.
  • notification_commitment: There is no statement committing to public notification of significant security incidents anywhere on the page.
    Fix: Add an explicit commitment to notify affected users and the public in the event of a significant security or data incident.
  • timeframe: No timeframe for disclosing incidents to affected users is mentioned on the page.
    Fix: Specify a concrete disclosure timeframe (e.g., notification within 72 hours of discovering a breach) in the incident response policy.

Transparency

FAIL Algorithmic decision criteria published
  • criteria_published: No specific criteria for any algorithmic decision-making are published on the page.
    Fix: Publish the specific input criteria used by any algorithms (e.g., factors driving recommendations or curation) in a dedicated transparency section.
  • weighting: The page provides no information about how criteria are weighted or prioritised in any algorithmic process.
    Fix: Document the relative weighting or prioritisation of each criterion used in algorithmic decisions so users can understand how outcomes are determined.
  • auditable: The AI statement is high-level and provides no technical or procedural detail enabling external audit or review.
    Fix: Publish an audit-ready disclosure including model/system descriptions, data sources, governance processes, and a contact route for independent review.
FAIL Open source code or tech docs
  • open_source: No source code repository or open-source links are provided anywhere on the about page.
    Fix: Add a link to a public code repository (e.g., GitHub) or state the site's open-source status if any components are released openly.
  • tech_docs: The page contains no technical documentation or links to any API, data, or developer documentation.
    Fix: Publish a technical documentation or developers section and link to it from the about/footer area if any technical resources are offered.

Responsibility to the Future

FAIL Environmental / sustainability disclosure
  • specific_metrics: The disclosure uses vague percentages like '75 per cent of printings' and 'annual GHG measurement' but publishes no actual carbon, energy use, or emissions figures.
    Fix: Publish concrete quantitative data such as measured annual GHG emissions in tonnes CO2e, total energy consumption, and year-over-year reduction figures.
  • hosting_disclosure: The policy addresses printing, offices, and travel but says nothing about the carbon or energy profile of its website or digital hosting infrastructure.
    Fix: Add a section disclosing the hosting provider's energy sourcing (e.g., green/renewable-powered data centres) and the website's estimated carbon footprint.
FAIL Succession and continuity plan
  • plan_exists: The about page describes Faber's history, partnerships, prizes, and AI stance but contains no published plan for what happens if the organisation fails or exits.
    Fix: Publish a succession or continuity plan describing what would happen to the business, its catalogue, and services in the event of closure or exit.
  • data_and_content_fate: The page never addresses what would happen to user data or published content if the organisation ceased operating.
    Fix: Add a statement clarifying how customer data and published/digital content would be preserved, transferred, or wound down if the organisation shuts down.
  • custodians_or_mirrors: No custodians, mirrors, or archive partners are identified anywhere on the page despite mentions of distribution partners like Faber Factory and the Independent Alliance.
    Fix: Name specific custodians, archival partners, or mirror arrangements that would safeguard content and data if Faber were unable to continue.
FAIL Worker wellbeing policy
  • accountability: The page references a Diversity Action Plan but does not name any person, role, or body responsible for overseeing worker conditions or wellbeing.
    Fix: Add a statement identifying who is accountable for worker wellbeing (e.g., an HR lead or named committee) and how staff can raise concerns or hold the company to account.