Do work worth publishing. Put your name on it.
sherafy.com is opening its publishing platform to a limited number of independent researchers, writers, analysts, and relentlessly curious people who want to investigate questions that matter.
This is not a traditional “write for us” program.
We are not trying to fill a content calendar, build a freelance writing pool, or find people to produce generic articles. sherafy.com already operates with a lean research team, extensive automation, and AI-assisted research systems that allow us to investigate and publish across a unusually broad range of subjects.
What interests us is something else:
People who find questions they cannot stop thinking about and are willing to do the work required to answer them properly.
If that describes you, sherafy.com can give that work a home.
You bring the question, research, judgment, connections, analysis, and point of view. We provide an established publishing platform, editorial infrastructure, fact-checking, search optimization, and a rigorous framework designed to turn good research into something people can actually find, understand, reference, and build upon.
Your work is published under your name.
Want to contribute?
sherafy.com contributor accounts are application-only. If our approach sounds like yours, tell us what you investigate and how you think.
[Apply to Become a Contributor →]
This is about authorship, not typing every sentence yourself
sherafy.com heavily uses artificial intelligence.
We encourage contributors to use it too.
AI is used throughout our own research, analysis, drafting, editing, verification, data work, and publishing workflows. The breadth and speed at which sherafy.com operates would not be practical without it.
We therefore do not use “AI-written” versus “human-written” as a meaningful test of whether work deserves publication.
For our purposes, the more important question is:
Who authored the work?
You do not need to manually type every sentence yourself.
You do need to author what you publish.
That means the intellectual work must be yours. You should understand the subject, choose or meaningfully shape the question, direct the investigation, evaluate the evidence, make the important judgments, challenge weak conclusions, guide whatever tools you use, and take responsibility for the finished article.
An AI model may help generate prose. It cannot take responsibility for the article.
You can.
A contributor should be able to explain:
- why the article exists;
- where its important claims came from;
- why particular evidence was considered credible;
- what remains uncertain;
- how competing explanations were evaluated;
- and why the final conclusions are justified.
We are not interested in policing whether somebody manually composed every paragraph.
We are interested in whether the work is good, original in thought, evidence-based, intellectually honest, and genuinely authored by the person whose name appears on it.
What if I do not want to use AI?
You are not required to use a particular model, company, or proprietary AI service. Open-source tools are perfectly compatible with our approach.
It is also possible to work without AI.
But sherafy.com is an AI-native publication. AI is part of our normal research and editorial environment, and contributors should be comfortable working within that environment.
If avoiding AI itself is an important moral or ideological requirement for you, this probably will not be the right publishing community.
There is no argument attached to that. Different people work differently.
This is simply how we work.
What we publish
The best sherafy.com work usually begins with a real question:
Is this actually true?
What really happened?
What does the underlying document actually say?
What does this study actually prove?
Where did this number come from?
Who funded this?
Where did the money go?
Why are these two apparently similar situations being treated differently?
What evidence actually supports this claim?
What is everyone leaving out?
We are particularly interested in:
- investigative explainers;
- fact checks that go beyond true/false labels;
- viral claims that deserve serious examination;
- public-record and document-driven research;
- science and health evidence;
- AI and technology;
- law, policy, government, and institutional power;
- human-rights questions;
- corporate accountability;
- technical explainers;
- original calculations and datasets;
- source tracing;
- overlooked historical questions;
- and strange questions for which the internet still does not have a satisfactory answer.
You do not need to stay inside those categories.
A strong question can come from almost anywhere.
Our editorial culture
sherafy.com is evidence-first.
We distinguish between:
Verified fact — what the available evidence establishes.
Disputed claim — what someone alleges but the evidence does not independently establish.
Reasonable inference — what the broader evidence strongly suggests even when direct proof is incomplete.
We do not manufacture false balance when one position is substantially better supported than another.
We also do not manufacture certainty simply because a stronger headline would be convenient.
We prefer primary documents, original research, datasets, court records, government records, corporate filings, contemporaneous evidence, and other sources that allow readers to examine the underlying material themselves.
Interested parties, governments, corporations, political organizations, advocacy groups, and activists can all provide useful information.
None automatically receives the status of neutral authority.
The evidence matters more than who said it.
Human rights are not a partisan exception
Contributors do not need to share every political opinion held by sherafy.com’s editors or by one another.
We are not building an ideological loyalty test.
We are building a research culture.
That culture does require several basic commitments.
Human beings have equal moral worth.
Civilian suffering does not become less important because the victims belong to the wrong country, religion, race, political faction, or social group.
Power deserves scrutiny regardless of who holds it.
Evidence should not be manipulated to protect a preferred political narrative.
Propaganda does not become reliable because it supports your side.
And if stronger evidence undermines the premise you began with, the article changes.
The conclusion follows the evidence, not the other way around.
What you receive
Accepted contributors can receive:
- a sherafy.com author byline;
- a public contributor profile;
- links to your website, Substack, GitHub, professional profile, or social accounts where appropriate;
- editorial review;
- fact-checking and source review;
- help strengthening research and argumentation;
- AI-assisted editorial support;
- headline and search-intent development;
- SEO and structural optimization;
- internal linking within sherafy.com’s existing knowledge base;
- publication under an established domain;
- and a permanent body of work you can point people toward.
The goal is not simply to give your article another place to appear.
It is to give strong work the best chance of becoming part of the searchable body of knowledge people encounter when they seriously investigate the subject.
What sherafy.com gets
We do not need contributors simply to produce more words.
What we value is more minds looking at more problems.
You may notice the court filing we missed.
You may recognize that a statistic repeated by fifty websites traces back to one badly interpreted source.
You may understand an industry we do not.
You may find an obscure dataset, reconstruct a chronology, challenge an assumption, notice a contradiction, or become obsessed with a question that had never occurred to us.
That is valuable.
The internet does not suffer from a shortage of content.
It suffers from a shortage of people willing to chase questions all the way down.
You do not need an audience
Follower counts are irrelevant to us.
You can have 30 followers or 3 million.
Social influence and research value are different things.
A person nobody has heard of can uncover something important.
A useful article can then be discovered through search, cited by another researcher, linked by a journalist, referenced in a discussion, surfaced by an AI system, or found years later by somebody investigating the same question.
That is the kind of distribution we care about.
Distribution of knowledge matters more than distribution of personality.
You also do not need traditional credentials
Credentials can matter when they demonstrate relevant expertise.
They are not a substitute for evidence.
We care much more about whether you can ask a good question, find reliable information, reason carefully, recognize uncertainty, and change your mind when the evidence requires it.
A subject-matter expert can make an excellent contributor.
So can an unusually persistent amateur investigator.
What we are not looking for
This is probably not a good fit if your main goal is:
- publishing promotional content;
- placing backlinks;
- submitting prewritten SEO articles;
- pushing a political organization’s talking points;
- laundering corporate or advocacy material into editorial content;
- publishing allegations you cannot substantiate;
- producing large quantities of generic AI content;
- protecting a predetermined conclusion from contradictory evidence;
- or simply seeing your name on another website.
AI can make weak work faster.
That is not what we mean by AI-assisted research.
How publication works
1. Apply
Tell us who you are, what interests you, how you think, and why you want to contribute.
You do not need an established publishing résumé.
2. Get approved
We review applications manually.
Public account registration is not open.
We would rather build a small group of thoughtful contributors than a large pool of people producing interchangeable content.
3. Choose a question
You can bring your own idea or explore questions and research opportunities suggested by sherafy.com.
You can also pitch an investigation before doing all of the work.
4. Research it
Follow the evidence.
Use whatever legitimate research tools help you do that, including AI.
Keep your sources.
Know what supports your claims.
5. Build the article
Your draft does not need to arrive perfectly edited.
It does need to contain real intellectual work.
AI-assisted drafting is encouraged when useful.
6. Editorial review
Every article goes through sherafy.com’s editorial process.
We may challenge conclusions, request stronger sourcing, verify calculations, restructure sections, rewrite headlines, improve search intent, clarify uncertainty, or send part of the investigation back for additional work.
That is part of the process.
7. Publication
Accepted work is published under your byline and contributor profile.
Corrections and substantive updates remain part of the article’s history when necessary.
One rule above everything else
Do not try to give us the conclusion you think we want.
Give us the best answer the evidence supports.
Sometimes the original allegation is correct.
Sometimes it is partly correct.
Sometimes the interesting story is that it is completely wrong.
All three can make excellent sherafy.com articles.
Interested?
Apply to become a sherafy.com contributor.
You do not need to prove that you are already a writer.
Show us that you are someone worth investigating questions with.
Do work worth preserving. Put your name on it.