Empathy Ledger

A guide for partners and funders

A story is made of decisions.

When you fund or use a story, you take part in choices that belong to other people.

This guide follows one person’s material through those choices. It shows who sees what, scales the same decisions to a network of organisations and sites, then hands the partnership decisions to you. What you choose shows what the partnership would protect, what it would ask of people’s time, and what still needs building or checking.

Part one · One person

A conversation becomes twenty‑four pieces.

A recording is transcribed into passages. Quotes are selected, photographs taken, themes named. Each piece carries its own permission, and each use is its own decision. This is Joe Kwon’s account, shown with his agreement. Where nothing has happened yet, the page says so. Scroll to follow his material through six movements.

Joe Kwon in low light, hands clasped, looking away from the camera.
Joe Kwon. Photograph shown with his consent.

Joe Kwon’s material · shown with his consent

0of 24 pieces released

1 · Listen

No public expression yetnothing released
◉ Held ◈ Needs another authority ◎ Proposed for a use ◌ Released ⊘ Withdrawn ↶ Returned

Movement 1 of 6 · Listen

It started as a conversation.

Joe Kwon sat down at the University of New South Wales on 15 September 2025 for Caring for those who care. He talked for 13,641 words: his mother, the streets, prison, the admission letter, ConFit. Agreeing to be recorded was one decision. Publishing was a separate one.

What the platform keeps The words written down, the recording and photos, and a note of when and where the conversation happened. transcripts · media_assets · field_sessions

Movement 2 of 6 · Hold

Everything arrived held.

The recording and its transcript are marked private, and they still are. Six photographs are linked to him. None of it was public by default, and most of it never will be unless he says so.

What the platform keeps Whose family the knowledge belongs to, how people are related, and a cultural review before anything moves. family_folders · kinship_relations · /cultural-review

Movement 3 of 6 · Decide

A particular use, a particular choice.

For the portrait wall, passages and quotes from five chapters of his life and two photographs were put forward, and his consent for that use is on record. The other four photographs were not agreed, so they were never proposed.

What the platform keeps Each yes and each no, including whether the words can be analysed. The storyteller makes these choices on their own private page. consents · analysis_use_grants · /me/[token]/story-permissions

Movement 4 of 6 · Release

What opens is small.

His page carries the chosen passages and quotes and the two agreed photographs. One article is cleared for ACT Regenerative Studio. The full recording stays private. A public page opens selected material. It does not open the whole source.

What the platform keeps A separate permission for every place a piece appears, and the exact version that went out. syndication_consent · embed_tokens · story_versions

Movement 5 of 6 · Trace

Nothing has been taken back.

Every piece on his page keeps a thread back to his record. The four photographs he did not agree to are refused wherever they are asked for. If he withdraws something, the removal follows the same thread out, and the platform does not promise that every copy elsewhere is erased.

What the platform keeps A history of every change of mind, a removal request to each site, and a regular check that removal really happened. consent_audit · syndication_removal_requests · /cron/verify-syndication-removal

Movement 6 of 6 · Return

Nothing has come back yet.

No response is recorded as returned to Joe. That space stays empty until something real goes in it. A promise and a completed action are recorded as different things, so an empty return is visible rather than papered over.

What the platform keeps Where the person’s material has been used, the messages that go back to them, and what was promised kept apart from what was done. /me/[token]/uses · wall_messages · impact_claims

Part two · Who sees what

One account, different views.

A storyteller, family, community, organisation and the public each have a different part in the relationship. A project brings the work together. It doesn’t make every source visible to everyone. Choose a relationship to see which pieces of the same account it can open.

These are roles in a relationship, not a map of the people pictured. Cultural authority is established with the relevant people. Other people’s privacy and shared cultural knowledge can require additional authority.

Part three · From one person to a network

The same decisions, at every scale.

Projects, organisations and partner sites add reach. They don’t add rights. Each step outward needs its own agreement, and a withdrawal has to be able to follow the material all the way out.

The larger dot is Joe, the person from part one.

One person

Network of storytellers, projects, an organisation and three partner sites

Scale 1 · A person

Everything in part one happened around one account.

One person, one steward, one partnership. The decisions are already there at this size: what is held, what is proposed, what is released, and what comes back.

Scale 2 · Projects

A project gathers accounts without merging them.

Twelve people across three projects. Each account keeps its own decisions. Being in the same project does not make every source visible to everyone in it.

What the platform keeps Who belongs to each project, without merging their accounts. projects · project_storytellers

Scale 3 · An organisation

Patterns become visible, and they are a use of their own.

Across projects, an organisation can see themes nobody could see from one account. Showing those patterns to a funder is a separate use, reviewed with the people they came from before release.

What the platform keeps The themes found across accounts, and how they shift over time. narrative_themes · /api/analytics/themes/evolution

Scale 4 · Partner sites

Released pieces travel with a consent for each site.

JusticeHub, Goods on Country and Oonchiumpa are three of the 17 partner websites registered today. Consent to appear on one does not carry over to another, so each site has its own record.

What the platform keeps The list of partner sites, a permission for each one, and a log of what went where. syndication_sites · syndication_consent · syndication_audit_log

Scale 5 · A withdrawal

One person changes their mind. Three sites hear about it.

The withdrawal follows the same path outward. Two sites confirm removal and one is still waiting on its custodian. What matters is that the unfinished removal stays visible until someone closes it. This isn’t hypothetical: ten permissions have been withdrawn across partner sites so far.

What the platform keeps Each removal request, and whether the site has confirmed it. syndication_removal_requests · /api/syndication/reconcile

Scale 6 · Next

The source stays home. Questions travel to it.

In a sovereign network, the community holds the full source in a home of its own. A funder sends a question and gets back an agreed answer, and no copy of the source changes hands. This is where the platform could go. It is not built.

Not built yet

Part four · Your decisions

Make the partnership decisions.

Five choices shape any partnership: where the source is held, who decides, what the first use is, how far pieces travel, and what comes back. Each one answers to a clause of How a story is held, the published standard. Choose yours. The record on the right shows what that partnership would protect, what it would ask of people, and what still needs building or checking.

Decision 1 of 5

These are example choices, already filled in. Change any of them.

Work with us

Start with one partnership.

Empathy Ledger has grown slowly, one organisation at a time, so nobody’s material is put at risk to test an idea. What gets built next should come from the people using it.

Try it

Use the screens first

We can set you up as an organisation, or as a storyteller, with test material. You see how it works before any real story goes in.

Shape it

Ask for what you need

Join the group deciding what comes next. Capture without internet, screens in first languages and care after someone passes away are waiting on the people who would use them.

Fund the proof

Test each promise

Pay for the promises in part five, below, to be tested on purpose, starting with a person taking their story back, and for the dated results to be published.

Talk to Ben Knightbenjamin@act.place

Part five · What exists and what comes next

Most of the journey is already in the code.

A reading of the platform’s code on 8 September 2026 counts 1,318 screens and connections. Below, each movement sets what is already built against what would carry the work toward a network communities hold themselves. Built means it exists in the platform. It does not yet mean it has been proven with real people and real data.

MovementBuilt nowNext, toward a sovereign network
ListenSee this in Joe’s story
  • Recording on a phone in the field
  • Capture on a computer with suggested tags
  • Bringing in existing photos and recordings
  • Transcription
/capture/api/field/transcriptions/api/intake/import-media
  • Capture that works without an internet connection
  • Screens built for speaking rather than typing, in people’s first languages
HoldSee this in Joe’s story
  • Each organisation keeps its storytellers, transcripts, media and every version of a story
  • Family folders, how people are related, cultural tags and cultural review
  • An elder review can record that someone pictured in a photograph has passed away
family_folderskinship_relations/cultural-reviewtenants
  • A home for the full source that the community holds itself
  • Moving a project from one home to another without losing its decisions
  • When someone passes away, what may still be shown (their name, their image, or neither) applied everywhere their stories, quotes and photographs appear
DecideSee this in Joe’s story
  • A private page where a storyteller reviews their story, chooses each use, hides analysis they don’t want, says yes or no to AI, and downloads everything
  • Permissions that can be renewed, withdrawn and checked
/me/[token]/api/consent/[id]/withdraw/api/consent/audit-trailanalysis_use_grants
  • Each community’s own rules, set by that community
  • Local Contexts labels that travel with the material so other systems can read them, applied by the people who hold the authority
ReleaseSee this in Joe’s story
  • A separate permission for each partner site
  • Ways to show a piece on another website
  • A feed partners can draw from
  • An annual report builder
/api/syndication/consent/api/v1/content-hub/storiesannual-reports/[reportId]/export
  • A consent record that travels with each released piece, which every partner site checks before display
TraceSee this in Joe’s story
  • A history of every change
  • Removal requests to partner sites
  • A regular check that removal happened
  • A way for partners to confirm a permission is still current
  • A record of every time AI was used
syndication_removal_requests/api/v1/accountability/consent/[token]/verify/api/v1/accountability/ai-runs
  • A public record of each test: who was let in, who was kept out, and when it was last checked
ReturnSee this in Joe’s story
  • Messages back to storytellers
  • A view of where their material is used
  • Promises kept apart from outcomes
/me/[token]/useswall_messagesimpact_claims
  • A return record: commitments, completed actions and open items, judged by the people who contributed
  • Recording what funding a use secured and what went back

Has anyone checked that the promises work?

Every promise below has been built. What matters to a partner is how far each one has been checked. There are three steps.

  1. BuiltIt exists in the platform.
  2. TriedSomeone used it while the platform was being built, and it responded. (28 July to 18 August 2026)
  3. ProvenIt was tested on purpose with the right person, the wrong person, a missing record and a change of mind, and the results were published.

Nothing has reached the third step yet. The storyteller’s own controls haven’t reached the second. That is the first thing a partnership could fund: prove each promise, starting with the ones that let a person take their story back, and publish the dated results. The promises answer to the ten clauses of How a story is held, Version 1, which is measured against the live platform.

Part six · Behind the page

What an organisation works in.

Each movement has a screen behind it. An organisation’s admin looks after its storytellers, projects and material in one place, and uses it to support the people whose stories it holds. The screens carry real people’s records, so they aren’t pictured here. We walk partners through them live, using a test account.

Listen · Hold

The person’s record

Everything held about one storyteller: their recordings and transcripts, photographs, stories, the organisations and projects they belong to, family links, and a summary of what they have agreed to.

/admin/people/[id]

Decide · Trace

People and their links

Every storyteller and their private link: whether it has been made, whether they have opened it, and whether it was retired. Who is ready to appear in public, and what needs following up.

/admin/people · /me/[token]

Hold

Photographs and faces

Galleries tagged by person, project and service. Once someone is named in a photograph, the platform can suggest them in others, and a new photograph of them appears on their own link so they can see it.

/admin/photos · /admin/face-clusters

Release

The story desk

A story is written beside its transcript and photographs, marked private, for the field or public, and sent out as a chosen organisation, under a project, to the partner sites that hold a yes for it.

/admin/articles · /admin/syndication

At every scale

The organisation view

The people an organisation tells stories with, their stories, projects, galleries and the themes across them. Organisations get the same working screens, without the controls that reach across the whole platform.

/admin/organisations/[id]

Proof

The standard, measured

The ten clauses of How a story is held, each checked against the live platform, showing what holds and what is still owed. Work in progress sits here in the open, including withdrawal reaching every site.

/admin/platform-board?view=standard

Part seven · Where it already runs

Real organisations, real websites.

Empathy Ledger holds the stories. Partner websites show them. Here is how that works, and who is doing it today. Figures come from the live platform, checked on 14 September 2026. They count activity, not impact.

  1. 1 · HeldThe story lives in Empathy Ledger

    With the person’s choices attached to every piece.

    stories · consents
  2. 2 · AskedA partner website asks for stories

    Each site has its own key, so the platform always knows who is asking.

    syndication_sites · API key
  3. 3 · ClearedOnly pieces with a yes for that site come back

    Shown with the name the storyteller chose.

    syndication_consent · /api/v1/content-hub
  4. 4 · Taken backA withdrawal reaches the site

    The site is told to remove it, and the removal is checked.

    syndication_removal_requests · verify-syndication-removal
17partner websites registered
141requests to show a story on one of them
10later withdrawn by the storyteller or their organisation

Also holding stories in Empathy Ledger

  • Orange Sky66 people · where this work began
  • BG Fit, Mount Isa20 stories
  • Mounty Yarns, Mount Druitt13 stories · with Just Reinvest
  • Confit Pathways12 stories
  • Diagrama11 stories
  • MingaMinga Rangers6 stories

Other websites drawing stories

Coming next

  • ReefTO Summit, Gladstone29 to 30 September · reflections from people at the event
  • Justice Reinvestment Network Australiaexploring it for their sites

Part eight · Three horizons

Where many careful partnerships could lead.

These aren’t forecasts. Each horizon names what would be true and what evidence would show it. Your choices in part four place a partnership on one of them.

Horizon one

Held well

One organisation, one partnership. Stories are held with their context. Each use is agreed, and a person can review, download and withdraw.

Evidence it is working

  • Every public piece links to a recorded decision
  • Withdrawals are completed and dated
  • Contributors say the return was useful

Horizon two

Shared infrastructure

Many organisations across domains, each in its own space, on common rails. Released pieces travel to partner sites with consent for each one.

Evidence it is working

  • Removal is verified on every site a piece reached
  • Partner sites check consent before display
  • Patterns across projects are reviewed with communities before release

Horizon three · not built

Sovereign network

Communities hold their own source. Questions travel to the data and agreed answers come back. Consent records and community protocols travel with each released piece, in a form other systems can read.

Evidence it is working

  • A community can leave with everything, decisions included
  • A funder’s question is answered without a copy leaving
  • It works with at least one peer system outside Australia

Learning from, not claiming

A global system would be built from other people’s traditions.

  • Maiam nayri Wingara and the CARE Principles: Indigenous data sovereignty grounded in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rights, and people and purpose placed within data governance.
  • Te Hiku Media: stewardship of Māori data, and why one licence can’t fit every community.
  • OCAP® (First Nations Information Governance Centre): ownership, control, access and possession, as each Nation expresses them.
  • Local Contexts: Traditional Knowledge and Biocultural Labels that make a community’s conditions visible as material circulates.
  • Referencing these doesn’t mean any of them approves or certifies Empathy Ledger. Working with any of them would start with a conversation.

Keep exploring

The ideas and research behind it.

Twelve short articles cover the relationships, research and practice this guide draws on. They aren’t on the public Empathy Ledger website yet, so you can read them here. Choose one to open it.

What this page can’t tell you

  • The person in part one is Joe Kwon. He agreed to this use on 14 September 2026, and that agreement is recorded as its own consent, separate from his consent for the portrait wall. The roles in part two and the network in part three are illustrative.
  • Figures about what is built and what has answered come from the platform map of 8 September 2026 and from development runs between 28 July and 18 August 2026, not from watching the platform work with real people.
  • Nothing here is a measured impact claim. Counts of stories or views measure activity and attention. They don’t on their own show improved wellbeing or social change.
  • The resource weights in part four show relative effort. They aren’t costings.

Story · authority · use · return