1. Editorial Ethics
1.1 Editors must manage the journal in accordance with the policies and objectives of the Thai Journal Citation Index Centre (TCI) and the Journal of the Asia Graduate School of Journalism.
1.2 Editors must review all articles submitted through the system impartially and without bias or prejudice.
1.3 The selection of qualified reviewers, based on the editor's role and responsibilities, must be transparent and based on their expertise, consistent with the articles submitted for consideration.
1.4 Editors must not disclose information between the authors and reviewers to any unrelated parties during the article evaluation process.
1.5 Editors must rigorously select articles in accordance with sound and reliable research procedures, aiming to truly benefit readers.
1.6 Editors must not have any direct or indirect interest in any article authors and/or reviewers.
1.7 Editors or the editorial team must not use articles or any portion of them for personal gain or for the benefit of those they intend to benefit. without the written consent of the article authors.

2. Publication Ethics
2.1 The quality of all articles will be assessed by peer reviewers in a double-blinded peer review format. This means that the reviewers will remain anonymous to the authors, and the authors will remain anonymous to the full list of reviewers.
2.2 All articles, both by internal and external authors, will be reviewed for quality by three peer reviewers, who are external reviewers from various institutions and internal to the journal organization, who have no conflict of interest with the authors.
2.3 All images, graphs/tables, and all text and articles, once published, are the sole responsibility of the authors.

3. Author Ethics
3.1 Articles submitted for consideration by authors must not be articles currently under submission or under consideration by other journals. If the authors are found to have concealed or if evidence is discovered, If the same article is duplicated in another journal, the journal editorial board can immediately revoke the publication of that article in the journal and suspend any future review of the article by the first author and corresponding author of that article.
3.2 Authors must present accurate and comprehensive study results or review results, free from any concealment, bias, or subjective bias. At the same time, authors should consider the benefits that readers or stakeholders will receive from the article upon publication and dissemination, both academically and practically.
3.3 It is the responsibility of the author to ensure that the manuscript format complies with the journal's specifications, and this must be known and implemented before entering the submission process.
3.4 All authors listed in the article must have been physically involved in the activities underlying the article submitted for consideration.
3.5 All citations appearing in the article must be included. Authors must conduct their work in accordance with the journal's ethical principles and established guidelines.
3.6 Authors must identify funding sources for their research (if any) and must also identify any conflicts of interest (if any).
3.7 Authors must immediately notify the editor if any errors in their research are discovered that could affect the conclusions of a manuscript currently under review or a published article.

4. Peer Reviewer Ethics
4.1 Reviewers should consider accepting articles in their field of expertise. They should evaluate articles based on content quality, clarity, and rigor, and should not use personal opinions as criteria for judging articles.
4.2 Reviewers, upon being invited by the editor to review an article and perceiving that accepting an article may create a conflict of interest with the author, and the review may not be conducted honestly, should notify the editor and decline the review.
4.3 Reviewers must not disclose information about received articles to unrelated parties during the review period.
4.4 Reviewers should be mindful of the author's need for publication upon receipt of the article. Evaluation should be conducted without delay.
4.5 If a reviewer discovers that an article or any part of an article overlaps with another's article, they must notify the editor.
4.6 Reviewers must not use the article or any part of it for personal gain or the benefit of others without the written consent of the author.
4.7 Reviewers should respect professional ethics, avoid biased evaluations, and adhere to the principles of accuracy, appropriateness, and fairness in order to maintain academic standards.