FAQ

Every Saturday, I research, score, and rank the week's biggest stories on power, democracy, and government accountability. This isn't just curation — I add my own reporting, context, and analysis. Every story is sourced. The whole thing takes about 10 minutes or less to read. There's no clickbait, no manufactured panic, no false balance. Just the news that affects you most, ranked so you know what to focus your attention on in your busy life.

I'm Huma Razvi — a former NBC and CBS journalist. I left the newsroom but the news never left me. The Fifth is my independent journalism practice, built to cover the stories legacy media undercovers, oversimplifies, or gets wrong. I don't answer to advertisers, conglomerates, or corporate owners. I answer to you. (See next question).

The Fifth represents a powerful new force — individuals, independent media, and grassroots movements operating outside traditional power structures. They don't answer to billionaires, rogue politicians, or power players, but to the people they serve. This is the "Fifth Estate."

The first three estates are the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government. The "Fourth Estate" is the media, which should hold the other three accountable.

The Fourth Estate isn't doing its job. Legacy media is failing in critical areas — inadequate coverage of complex issues, sensationalism over substance, false equivalency, and a lack of diversity in who gets to tell the story. The Fifth brings journalism back to its roots: truth, transparency, and fearless reporting.

Each story is evaluated on seven criteria:

• Power & Precedent — Is this an abuse of power? Is it unprecedented?
• Scale — How directly and specifically are people affected?
• Severity (weighted 2x) — How harmful is it? Is the damage reversible?
• Disinformation — Is there an active effort to mislead the public?
• Suppression — Is oversight or transparency being blocked?
• Urgency (weighted 2x) — Is the window for action or awareness closing?
• Momentum — Is this story actively moving this week?

Severity and Urgency carry double weight because real-world harm and closing windows matter more than anything else. Stories are scored out of a maximum of 45 points.

Over time, I will refine this scoring system and post updates here as needed.

Last update: February 15, 2026

Every week, I score the biggest stories on power, democracy, and government accountability across seven criteria (see previous question), then rank them from the top down. Some weeks that's four stories, some weeks it's six — it depends on what's happening.

The ranking isn't a gimmick. It's an editorial tool that forces me to prioritize ruthlessly, so you don't have to.

It has to be in my "lane." My beat is what our government does, how it impacts people at scale, and whether democracy is functioning the way it should.

Not everything that's trending matters, and not everything that matters is trending. That's the whole point of the ranking.

The rank is the editorial judgment — that's what's useful to you. Showing raw numbers would invite arguments about whether a story "deserves" a 4 vs. a 5, which misses the point. What you see is the rank, movement (whether a story went up, down, or is new), and status labels like ESCALATING or DEVELOPING for stories that aren't ranked but should be on your radar.

The scoring keeps my process disciplined. The ranking helps you decide where to focus.

Good. That means you're paying attention. The ranking reflects both a structured scoring system and over 20 years of editorial judgment — it's disciplined, but it's not a formula. I'm one journalist making calls every week, and reasonable people can see things differently. If you think a story should be higher or lower, that's a conversation worth having. Reach out — I read everything.

Yes — and I'm upfront about it. I use AI tools as part of my workflow. Not as a replacement for journalism, but as a way to do more rigorous work, faster, as a one-person newsroom. For better or worse, AI is here — and pretending it doesn't exist isn't an option. The question is how you use it, and whether you're honest about it.

For example, Claude helped me edit this very FAQ — the same way I'd use an editor to sharpen language and structure, but not the ideas.

I use AI in three parts of my process:

Research and fact-finding. AI helps me search across sources, cross-reference claims, and surface relevant context faster than I could manually. It's a research accelerator — I verify everything independently.

Drafting and editing. AI assists with structuring and polishing copy. Every word is reviewed, revised, and approved by me. The editorial judgment, voice, and analysis are mine.

Graphics and visuals. AI helps generate the social media graphics — the daily news posts and weekly ranked carousel — so I can maintain a consistent visual identity without a design team.

No. AI is a tool in my workflow, the same way a search engine or a word processor is. The reporting, the ranking, the scoring, the editorial calls — that's all me. I've been a journalist for over 20 years. AI helps me work faster and more efficiently. It doesn't do the journalism.

If I'm holding power accountable, I need to be accountable too. You deserve to know how the work gets made. Many newsrooms use AI tools and don't tell you. I'd rather you know.

When was the last time you solved a problem by ignoring it?

Endless cable news and doomscrolling make you feel worse, not more informed. The Fifth gives you what matters in under 10 minutes, once a week. You're done when you reach the end.

Remember: You can't fix everything. But staying informed means you're ready when it's time to act.

Everyone is biased — myself included. I'm transparent about mine. As Christiane Amanpour puts it, I believe in being "truthful, not neutral." Facts aren't up for debate. My commitment is to accuracy, sourcing, and holding power accountable, regardless of who holds it.

"Both-sidesism" means giving equal weight to unequal positions — treating a fact and a lie as two sides of a debate. It distorts truth and fairness. News coverage should be proportional to reality, not artificially balanced.

The newsletter lands once a week because that's where the deep analysis lives — scored, ranked, sourced. But @readthefifth on Instagram posts daily news Monday through Friday, so you're never out of the loop between issues.

I prioritize sources with strong track records for factual reporting. I use media reliability tools like the Ad Fontes Media Bias Chart to gut-check source quality, but I also rely on 20+ years of editorial judgment. Sometimes a source like The New York Times has solid reporting worth sharing even when their framing distorts the bigger picture. I'll use the reporting and call out the framing. Every claim in The Fifth is linked to its source so you can evaluate it yourself.

For now, yes. I'm building something new and it's still evolving. As The Fifth grows, I'll explore sustainable ways to keep delivering trusted, independent journalism — and I'll be transparent about what that looks like.

If legacy media were doing this job, perhaps I wouldn't need to. But it's not — so here we are. The Fifth offers something specific: a ranked, scored, sourced weekly briefing on power and democracy from an independent journalist who calls it what it is. If that's what you've been looking for, you're in the right place.

The single biggest thing you can do is share it. Forward the newsletter to one person who you think needs it.

Follow @readthefifth and @humaexplains on Instagram. Word of mouth is everything for independent journalism.

• Newsletter: fromthefifth.com (published every Saturday)
• Instagram: @readthefifth (daily news graphics + weekly ranked carousel)
• Instagram: @humaexplains (video commentary + the "why it matters")
• Medium & Substack: The newsletter is cross-posted to both platforms

Yes. If you think something belongs in the rankings, I want to hear about it. Reply to any newsletter email or email me at huma@fromthefifth.com.

I can't cover everything, but I read everything.