The most common question about our expert opinion section is how we verify that a contributor actually has the expertise their bio claims, given how easy it is to present credentials favorably.
Why this verification matters
Expert opinion carries weight specifically because of the contributor's claimed expertise, and readers reasonably want assurance that expertise is genuine rather than self-described without scrutiny.
What we actually check
We verify claimed credentials and professional background independently before publication, rather than relying solely on a contributor's own self-description, and we decline contributions when we can't adequately verify the underlying expertise claim.
Why this sometimes means turning down otherwise interesting pieces
We've declined pieces with genuinely interesting arguments when we couldn't sufficiently verify the author's claimed background, since we think the credibility of the expertise claim matters as much as the argument itself in this specific section.
Why we hold this standard
Expert opinion's value depends on the expertise actually being real, and we think that verification responsibility falls on us before publication, not on readers after the fact.