Editorial Guide

InfoWorld serves technology professionals and business leaders who seek informed, independent analysis of enterprise tech. Produced by an experienced staff of writers and editors in collaboration with a network of expert freelance contributors, InfoWorld identifies emerging technology trends, reviews enterprise products, and provides lively commentary to help technology decision makers determine what to buy and how to use it.

Editorial FAQ

InfoWorld is written primarily by paid, independent contributors, many of whom are working technology professionals who have long been associated with the publication. This extended network, combined with our veteran editors and writers on staff, represents a deep knowledge base across all key areas of enterprise technology.

What kinds of content does InfoWorld publish?

InfoWorld publishes feature articles, product reviews, blogs, slideshows, videos, and news analysis related to enterprise technology and the issues that surround it. Topics areas include application development, cloud computing, databases, data center infrastructure, IT careers, mobile technology, networking, operating systems, security, and storage (a complete list can be found here).

I'm a freelance writer -- how do I pitch an idea for an article?

Begin by focusing on the readership. Technology professionals who serve the enterprise have specific sets of needs relating to cost, efficiency, agility, integration, and long-term effectiveness. Pitches that reflect that understanding -- as well as an awareness of the trends most exciting to our audience -- have the best chance of landing an assignment. We seek engaging, professionally-written articles that surface salient issues and reflect a thorough, accurate understanding of the technical subject matter at hand.

Experienced freelance technology writers are encouraged to send their queries to the appropriate editors:

I'm a PR professional -- how do I pitch an idea for an article?

Your best bet for pitching a story is to reach out directly to the appropriate writer or editor (consult our Editorial Contacts).

Please note that our writers focus on analysis, not product announcements, although we welcome advance notice of major product introductions. For those seeking coverage of new product versions, executive appointments, earnings news, or other vendor-focused matters, please contact the IDG News Service, which provides news stories to InfoWorld and most other IDG publications. A list of IDG News Service beats can be found here.

Do you honor embargoes?


Does InfoWorld accept vendor-written contributions?

InfoWorld does not accept unsolicited articles from vendors. However, selectively and by assignment, InfoWorld works with individuals employed by technology firms to write vendor-neutral articles subject to the usual editing process. Separately, our sales team offers the BrandPost program for distributing vendor-contributed content to InfoWorld readers.

How do I keep up with the latest from InfoWorld?

Subscribe to our email newsletters or discover other ways to follow us.

Editorial Staff

Online story requests, press releases and story tips should be sent to the appropriate editorial beat writer.

Editor in Chief

Eric Knorr

Executive Editors

Doug Dineley, InfoWorld Test Center
Galen Gruman

Managing Editor

Uyen Phan


Jason Snyder, Senior Editor
Pete Babb, Associate Editor
Caroline Craig, East Coast Site Editor
Lisa Schmeiser, Newsletter Editor
Lisa Blackwelder, Senior Production Editor

Staff Writers

Paul Krill, Editor at Large
Serdar Yegulalp, Senior Writer

Administrative Support

Linda Gorgone, Office Manager

InfoWorld Columnists

Anonymous InfoWorld readers: Off the Record
Pete Babb: InfoWorld InfoTube
J. Peter Bruzzese: Enterprise Windows
Caroline Craig: Tech Watch
Robert X. Cringely®: Notes from the Field
Roger A. Grimes: Security Adviser
Galen Gruman: Smart User, Mobile Edge
Eric Knorr: Modernizing IT
Paul Krill: Tech Watch
James Kobielus: Extreme Analytics
David Linthicum: Cloud Computing
Woody Leonhard: Tech Watch
Andrew C. Oliver: Strategic Developer
Simon Phipps: Open Sources
Bill Snyder: Tech's Bottom Line
Paul Venezia: The Deep End
Serdar Yegulalp: Tech Watch

InfoWorld Test Center Contributors

James R. Borck
Brian Chee
Paul Ferrill
Victor R. Garza
Rick Grehan
Roger A. Grimes
Galen Gruman
Martin Heller
Woody Leonhard
High Mobley
Matt Prigge
Keith Schultz
Paul Venezia
Peter Wayner
Serdar Yegulalp

Reviews Policy

InfoWorld and the IDG Enterprise Test Labs (an alliance of the independent product testing and review teams of InfoWorld, Computerworld, and Network World) follow strict ethical guidelines when testing and reviewing products in order to ensure that all results are objective, fair, and accurate.


All reviews are based on our own hands-on testing by either staff or freelance reviewers under our editorial guidance. They are commissioned and paid for solely by InfoWorld or other members of IDG Enterprise Test Labs.

We recognize that some of our reviewers may perform private testing or other work for vendors. In order to draw a clear distinction between private testing for vendors and tests commissioned by InfoWorld or IDG Enterprise Test Labs, reviewers who test a product for a vendor are prohibited from testing that product for InfoWorld or IDG Enterprise Test Labs for a period of 90 days. Reviewers with an ongoing business relationship with a technology vendor are disqualified from reviewing any of the vendor's products.

In addition, we prohibit reviewers from accepting any form of compensation from a vendor in the course of reviewing one of the vendor's products. And we prohibit reviewers from direct investment in companies whose products they test and from being otherwise fiscally affiliated.

Acquiring review products

For large-scale comparative tests, we send an invitation letter to all vendors whose products we're requesting. In it, we request the materials we need, describe the test methodology, explain our policies, and set deadlines.

Typically we ask vendors to provide products for review. However, we reserve the right to review products we acquire through other channels, including purchase. If we test a product a vendor has not provided directly, we notify the vendor of that fact.

Once a vendor has sent a requested product, we will review it unless we find technical or other problems that make it impossible for us to complete the process.

We try to review currently available production code for all products, because it represents what's available to our readers. However, we will look at beta code in the early stages of the review process in order to speed our final evaluation of the gold or released code. When we do review beta code, we will clearly identify it as such.

For high-end hardware and software, we may offer vendors the opportunity to visit the testing site to help us configure their products. If we invite one vendor, we issue the invitation to all participating vendors.

The review process

During the installation and testing process our reviewers maintain an accurate record of all changes made to default product configurations, whether made by the reviewer or the vendor's representatives. If a reviewer uncovers performance results that deviate strongly from our expectations, we will contact the vendor and share those findings.

This gives the vendor the opportunity to verify our findings independently. We want to make sure that any unusual results we uncover can be attributed to the product and not to errors in our testing procedures. Where appropriate, we can include the vendor's feedback in the review to explain unexpected results. However, vendors' requests to see a review before publication are not granted, and no vendor may influence the test results.

We respond immediately to responses from vendors or readers who reasonably question our results or methodology. Accuracy is the primary criterion for every review, and any time we fail to meet that criterion we make the appropriate corrections on our website.

If we discover that we've made a mistake during the testing process, we feel obligated to rectify it. That may mean retesting a product, which we will do if the mistake is on our part, as long as the test bench is still in place. (If a vendor disputes our results because, for instance, it sent a hardware unit that was limited compared to other units tested despite having read and understood the proposed methodology, we will not retest a different unit.) We sometimes test using hardware and software loaned by vendors, to which we have access for only a limited amount of time. For that reason, it's important that we receive any inquiries about our results within the week the review appears online.

While we do our best to ensure we're making the most appropriate tests, we can't guarantee that our results mark the only possible assessment of a given product. Users who emphasize uses other than the primary ones we test for may draw different conclusions.

Editorial FAQ

Go to Editorial FAQ

Editorial Staff

Go to Editorial Contacts.

Reviews Policy

Go to Reviews Policy.


Go to Permissions.

Media Kit