Taylor & Francis

https://www.taylorandfrancis.com · 53/92 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 31/37 (6 failed)
Level 2 — Enhanced 8/27 (19 failed)
Level 3 — Advanced 1/10 (8 failed)

By category

CategoryResult
Accessibility 11/13
Accountability 0/5
AI & Automation 4/8
Interoperability 3/3
Privacy 9/16
Provenance 1/2
Security 7/11
Transparency 5/13
Responsibility to the Future 0/3

Level 1 — Basic

Accessibility

AI & Automation

FAIL AI use policy in place
  • policy_exists: The page content shows only generic corporate navigation and descriptions with no visible AI policy or statement present.
    Fix: Publish a dedicated AI use policy at /ai-policy that clearly states the organization's position and rules on AI use.
  • scope_clear: No AI-related content appears on the page, so there is no explanation of what AI is used for.
    Fix: Add a clear scope section describing specific AI use cases (e.g., editorial, peer review, author services) within the policy.

Privacy

Security

Transparency

FAIL Funding/sponsorship disclosure
  • disclosure_exists: The page content contains no funding or sponsorship disclosure, only general corporate and publishing information.
    Fix: Add a dedicated funding disclosure section that identifies sources of funding or sponsorship for the organization and its activities.
  • transparent: No funding sources are identified anywhere on the page.
    Fix: Clearly list all funding sources (e.g., parent company contributions, grants, sponsorships) with names and relationships.

Level 2 — Enhanced

Accessibility

Accountability

FAIL Named responsible person
  • named_person: The page lists only generic teams and office locations (e.g., 'HQ', 'Customer Service') without naming any specific person or clearly defined responsible role.
    Fix: Add the name or job title of a specific accountable individual or role (e.g., 'Head of Customer Support – Jane Doe') for each contact area.
FAIL Published response timeframes
  • response_timeframe: The page contains no published response timeframe for complaints; it only shows navigation and general company information.
    Fix: Publish a clear response timeframe for complaints (e.g., 'We acknowledge complaints within 5 business days and respond within 20').
  • specific: No specific timeframes in days or weeks are provided anywhere on the page.
    Fix: State specific numeric timeframes such as acknowledgement within X business days and resolution within Y days.
FAIL Documented complaints process
  • process_exists: No documented complaints or feedback process appears on the page; the content is generic navigation and company description.
    Fix: Add a dedicated complaints procedure describing how to submit, escalate, and resolve complaints.
  • steps_clear: There are no visible steps explaining how to make a complaint on this page.
    Fix: Provide a numbered step-by-step guide (e.g., 1. Contact support, 2. Submit formal complaint form, 3. Escalation path) with contact details for each stage.
FAIL Clear appeals process
  • appeals_exists: The page content contains no documented appeals process despite the /appeals path; it only shows generic navigation and corporate descriptions.
    Fix: Publish a clear appeals procedure on this page detailing how users can submit appeals, required information, timelines, and expected outcomes.
  • independent: There is no mention of any independent reviewer or escalation path for appeals on the page.
    Fix: Describe an independent review body or escalation tier (e.g., an ombudsperson or external reviewer) that handles appeals separately from the original decision-makers.

AI & Automation

FAIL Published AI use policy (detailed)
  • detailed_scope: The page contains no AI policy content, so detailed scope of AI use is absent.
    Fix: Include a detailed breakdown of AI applications, covering authors, editors, reviewers, and internal operations.
  • limitations: No acknowledgement of AI limitations is present since the page shows no AI-related material.
    Fix: Add a section explicitly acknowledging AI limitations such as hallucinations, bias, and lack of accountability.
  • safeguards: No safeguards or quality controls are described anywhere in the visible page content.
    Fix: Describe concrete safeguards such as human oversight, disclosure requirements, and quality assurance processes for AI-assisted work.
FAIL AI-assisted content clearly marked
  • marking_policy: The page content shown contains no policy or statement about marking or labeling AI-assisted content.
    Fix: Publish an explicit AI content marking policy on the /ai-policy page describing how AI-assisted content is disclosed and labeled.
  • consistent: Without a stated marking policy, there is no evidence that AI content marking is applied consistently across the site.
    Fix: Define and document consistent AI disclosure labels and apply them uniformly to all AI-assisted content across Taylor & Francis properties.
FAIL Human oversight of AI documented
  • oversight_exists: The page content provides no documentation of human oversight over AI outputs.
    Fix: Add a section to the AI policy page describing how humans oversee and validate AI-generated outputs before publication.
  • review_process: No review or approval process for AI content is described in the visible page content.
    Fix: Document a clear step-by-step review/approval workflow for AI-assisted content, including checkpoints and sign-off criteria.
  • accountability: The page does not identify any role, team, or individual accountable for AI-generated content.
    Fix: Name an accountable owner (e.g., an AI governance lead or editorial committee) responsible for AI-generated content on the policy page.

Interoperability

Privacy

FAIL Human-readable privacy policy
  • comprehensive: The visible content covers cookies in detail but does not comprehensively describe all personal data collected and the purposes beyond cookies (e.g., account data, payment data).
    Fix: Include or clearly link to a full privacy policy section on this page that describes all categories of personal data collected, the purposes, legal bases, and third-party sharing beyond cookies.
FAIL Data collection limited to necessity
  • necessity: The policy does not explicitly state that data collection is limited to what is necessary, only distinguishing 'strictly necessary' cookies from optional ones.
    Fix: Add an explicit statement that data collection is limited to what is necessary for the stated purposes (data minimisation principle).
  • proportionate: There is no statement addressing proportionality of data collected relative to the service provided, and multiple analytics/advertising trackers are used without justification of proportionality.
    Fix: Add a clear statement explaining how the scope of data collection is proportionate to the services offered and justify use of advertising/analytics trackers.
FAIL Published data retention periods
  • retention_stated: Retention periods are only mentioned for commenter cookies ('a little under one year') and not for other data or most cookies.
    Fix: Add explicit retention periods for each category of cookie and personal data collected.
  • specific: Aside from the commenter cookie note, the page lacks specific time-bound retention periods for cookies and personal data.
    Fix: Specify concrete retention durations (e.g., 'X months' or 'Y years') for every cookie and data category listed.
FAIL No dark patterns in consent flows
  • no_dark_patterns: The policy states 'By continuing to use the Website, you consent to our use of Cookies,' which is an implied/manipulative consent mechanism considered a dark pattern under GDPR-style standards.
    Fix: Replace implied consent-by-browsing with an explicit opt-in mechanism requiring affirmative action before non-essential cookies are set.
  • equal_choices: The page describes only a notification banner and does not indicate a reject option is offered with equal prominence to accept.
    Fix: Provide a clearly visible 'Reject All' button alongside 'Accept All' in the cookie banner with equal styling and prominence.
  • no_forced_consent: Consent is bundled across performance, advertising, and functionality cookies via continued use of the website rather than allowing granular choice.
    Fix: Implement granular per-category toggles so users can consent to each cookie category independently without being forced to accept all.
FAIL Cookie banner partner disclosure
  • banner_present: The page content shows no visible cookie or consent banner; only a 'Cookies' link under policies is present.
    Fix: Implement a visible cookie consent banner on page load that allows users to accept, reject, or customize cookie preferences.
  • partner_sharing_mentioned: There is no on-page consent copy or banner disclosing data sharing with third-party partners.
    Fix: Add consent banner copy that explicitly discloses whether and how user data is shared with third-party advertising or analytics partners.
  • partner_count_specific: No partner sharing disclosure exists, so no specific numeric count of partners is stated on the page.
    Fix: If third-party partners are used, state the exact number of partners in the consent banner and link to a full partner list.

Provenance

Security

Transparency

FAIL Named responsible person in contact
  • named_person: No named individual is provided, and team references are generic (e.g., 'Customer Service', 'Newsroom') without identifying responsible personnel.
    Fix: Identify a named individual or clearly specified team lead responsible for each category of enquiry on the contact page.
FAIL Funding disclosed with detail
  • detail: The page provides no details about funding amounts, percentages, or categories.
    Fix: Include specific figures or percentage breakdowns of funding by category (e.g., subscriptions, open access fees, sponsorships).
  • complete: No funding streams are disclosed at all, so coverage of major streams cannot be established.
    Fix: Publish a comprehensive funding statement enumerating every major revenue/funding stream supporting the organization.
FAIL Governance structure disclosed
  • governance_exists: The page describes company history, purpose, and brands but does not describe a governance or editorial structure on this page.
    Fix: Add a dedicated section (or link) outlining the governance and editorial oversight structure, including editorial boards, committees, and decision-making processes.
  • roles_clear: The page references a leadership team link but does not identify key roles or their responsibilities on the page itself.
    Fix: Include or directly surface descriptions of key governance roles (e.g., executive leadership, editorial directors, board members) and their specific responsibilities.
FAIL Algorithm explanation if applicable
  • algorithm_explained: The About page does not mention any algorithms or explain their purpose.
    Fix: Add a section or link describing any algorithms used (e.g., for content recommendation or editorial decisions) and their purpose.
  • impact_clear: No description of how algorithmic decisions affect users (authors, readers, researchers) is provided on the page.
    Fix: Include a clear statement explaining how algorithmic processes impact users and their experience on the platform.
FAIL Annual data practices statement
  • annual_statement: The page links to a privacy policy but provides no evidence of a regular or annual review of data practices.
    Fix: Publish a statement (e.g., within the privacy policy) confirming that data practices are reviewed on a defined periodic cadence such as annually.
  • dated: The About page does not display a date or version for the privacy policy or data practices statement.
    Fix: Add a visible 'last updated' date or version number to the privacy policy and reference it from relevant pages.

Level 3 — Advanced

Accessibility

FAIL Published accessibility statement
  • known_issues: The statement generally notes that older titles 'may not offer this functionality' but does not disclose specific known accessibility issues, non-conformances, or WCAG gaps on its websites and platforms.
    Fix: Add a clearly labeled section listing specific known accessibility limitations and any parts of the site/content that do not yet meet WCAG 2.2 AA.
  • remediation_timeline: While the page says it is 'working on' backlist content and journals, it provides no target dates or committed timeline for resolving the known issues.
    Fix: State concrete target completion dates or milestones (e.g., 'backlist alt text remediation by Q4 2027') for addressing known accessibility gaps.
  • feedback_channel: The page references generic 'Contact' navigation but offers no dedicated accessibility feedback channel or commitment to a response time.
    Fix: Add a specific accessibility contact (email/form) and a stated response commitment, such as acknowledging feedback within a set number of business days.

Accountability

FAIL Published moderation policies
  • policy_exists: The page at /moderation contains no moderation policy content, only general corporate navigation and publisher descriptions.
    Fix: Publish an explicit moderation policy document at this URL outlining scope, rules, and user responsibilities.
  • criteria_clear: No moderation criteria (e.g., prohibited content, acceptable behavior) are stated anywhere on the page.
    Fix: Add a clearly labeled section listing specific criteria for what content or behavior will be moderated, removed, or allowed.
  • enforcement: There is no description of how moderation decisions are made, appealed, or enforced on this page.
    Fix: Include an enforcement section describing review procedures, actions taken, appeal processes, and contact points for moderation concerns.

Interoperability

Security

FAIL Incident response plan published
  • plan_exists: The About page lists company policies like Privacy Policy and Modern Slavery but contains no published incident response plan or security incident policy.
    Fix: Publish a dedicated incident response plan or security incident policy and link to it from the site's policy footer.
  • notification_commitment: The page includes no statement committing to public notification of significant security or data incidents.
    Fix: Add an explicit commitment to notify affected users and the public when significant incidents occur.
  • timeframe: There is no stated timeframe for disclosing incidents to affected users anywhere on the page.
    Fix: Specify a concrete disclosure timeframe (e.g., notification within 72 hours of confirming an incident) in the incident response policy.

Transparency

FAIL Algorithmic decision criteria published
  • criteria_published: No specific criteria for any algorithmic decision-making are published on this page.
    Fix: Publish a transparency page listing the specific criteria used in any algorithmic decisions relevant to publishing or content ranking.
  • weighting: There is no explanation of how criteria are weighted or prioritized in any algorithmic process.
    Fix: Document the relative weight or priority of each criterion used by algorithms, and link it from the About or policies section.
  • auditable: The page provides no technical or procedural detail that would allow external audit of algorithmic systems.
    Fix: Provide sufficient documentation (methodology, data sources, review procedures) to enable independent audit of algorithmic decision-making.
FAIL Open source code or tech docs
  • open_source: The page contains no reference or link to publicly available source code for the site or its platforms.
    Fix: Add a link to a public code repository (e.g., GitHub) for any open-source components of the site or publishing platform.
  • tech_docs: No technical documentation is referenced or linked from the about page.
    Fix: Publish and link to technical documentation (e.g., API docs, platform specifications) from the about or developer section of the site.

Responsibility to the Future

FAIL Environmental / sustainability disclosure
  • hosting_disclosure: The page discusses print supply chain and product emissions but provides no information on the carbon or energy profile of its digital hosting or IT infrastructure.
    Fix: Add a section disclosing the energy source and carbon footprint of the website's hosting and data center infrastructure, ideally referencing green hosting providers or renewable energy usage.
FAIL Succession and continuity plan
  • plan_exists: The page describes company history, purpose, and brands but contains no published plan for what happens if Taylor & Francis fails or exits the market.
    Fix: Publish a succession or business-continuity plan outlining how operations and services would be maintained or wound down if the organisation ceases to operate.
  • custodians_or_mirrors: The page and its listed policies do not name any custodians, mirrors, or third-party archive partners that would take over content preservation if the company fails.
    Fix: Identify and publicly name archive partners or custodians (e.g., CLOCKSS, Portico, or a national library) responsible for preserving content in a succession scenario.
FAIL Worker wellbeing policy
  • policy_exists: The page references benefits, rewards & recognition, and learning & development as navigation links but does not publish an actual worker wellbeing or working conditions policy on this page.
    Fix: Publish a dedicated worker wellbeing/working conditions policy statement on the careers page describing your standards and approach.
  • specific_commitments: The page mentions a supportive and inclusive working environment in general terms but includes no specific commitments on pay, hours, mental health, or benefits.
    Fix: Add concrete commitments such as pay principles, working-hour standards, mental health support offerings, and detailed benefits.
  • accountability: The page names no individual, team, or governance body responsible for overseeing worker conditions or wellbeing.
    Fix: Identify a responsible owner (e.g., HR/People function or a named committee) with oversight for worker wellbeing and conditions.