A maintained case file. A way into the context. Room to go deeper.
Inside the storyExplore by layer
01The essential context↗
02A timeline of events↗
03People & connections↗
04The evidence beneath it↗
05What changed since↗
For stories that outlast the news cycle.
Context over volumeEvidence over virality
The missing context
The updates keep coming. The story gets lost.
A public inquiry. A financial controversy. An institutional failure.
Each unfolds across disconnected headlines, documents, and competing
accounts.
The news cycle moves on.
The context should stay. Ekuri’s starting point is
a library of maintained case files: a place to understand how the
pieces fit, and how the record changes.
The first reportThe wider contextWhat follows
Explore the concept
Start with the story. Peel deeper.
Get the essentials, then follow your curiosity into the chronology,
connections, and evidence. Stop when you have enough.
Case file / The Lark footbridgeFictional example
The essential context
A bridge promised. An opening postponed.
The fictional town of Lark approved a footbridge to reconnect
two neighborhoods. The opening was postponed after a design
review. Residents want to understand the delay — and when they
can cross the river again.
Documented in this example
The council approved the project. Its progress notice
later moved the planned opening.
Still unresolved
The final cost and a confirmed opening date have not been
published.
Enough context for now? You can stop here.
How the story unfolded
Put the updates in order.
The council approves the bridge
A planning resolution sets out the purpose and the
proposed opening period.
Illustrative source 01 · Council record
The opening is postponed
A progress notice says a design review is needed. It
does not give a new date.
Illustrative source 02 · Progress notice
The design review is published
The review recommends a revised access ramp. Cost and
timing remain open.
Illustrative source 03 · Design review
People, organizations & roles
Understand who does what.
A connection should explain a documented role, not imply guilt
or hidden influence.
Public bodyLark Council
Approves the project
commissions
ProjectLark footbridge
Proposed river crossing
Review bodyDesign review panel
Reviews accessibility
recommends changes to
Design elementAccess ramp
Part of the footbridge
All names and roles are fictional. In a published case, each
consequential relationship would need a traceable source.
The record beneath the story
See what a source supports.
Open a note to see the difference between what a document
establishes and what it leaves unanswered.
01Council planning record
Illustrative document · 12 January
Supports: the project was approved, with
a proposed opening period.
Does not establish: that construction
would finish on time. A target is not a guarantee.
02Project progress notice
Illustrative document · 8 May
Supports: the opening was postponed and a
design review was requested.
Does not establish: the final cause,
cost, or responsibility for every part of the delay.
03Published design review
Illustrative document · 21 June
Supports: the review recommends changes
to the access ramp.
Does not establish: a revised budget or a
confirmed opening date.
These are written examples, not real documents or source
links.
An example of a return visit
The story moved. You haven’t lost your place.
Imagine returning after the May update. Here is what a concise
change note could tell you.
Added · 21 June
The design review is now available
It recommends a revised access ramp. The timeline and source
notes now include that finding.
Still unresolved
No confirmed date or final cost
The new document does not resolve those questions. They stay
visible in the case file.
A future direction. This demo does not track your visits.
A small, interactive illustration of the product direction. The
town, project, events, and documents are invented. Ekuri has not
published a real case library yet.
Explore at your own pace.
Built for continuity
Leave for a while. Keep the thread.
You shouldn’t have to follow every update to understand a story.
We’re exploring a way to show what has changed since your last
visit — with the earlier context still in place.
Product direction / not yet available
A possible return visit
Since you last checked in
+
A new document, in context
What it adds, and which questions remain open.
↗
A response beside the claim
Another account, with its source and date.
↺
A correction made visible
What was revised, and why.
You’re caught up. The rest of your day is yours.
The editorial foundation
Clarity begins with showing your work.
These are the principles we’re building toward. The way a story is
presented matters as much as what it contains.
01 / Traceability
Keep the sources close.
Consequential claims should lead back to supporting reporting and
original documents.
02 / Distinction
Give claims their context.
A documented finding, an allegation, a response, and an
interpretation are different things. Make that distinction clear.
03 / Accountability
Leave room for revision.
Make uncertainty visible. Include relevant responses. Show
corrections and how the record has changed.
04 / Attention
Offer a place to stop.
A useful explanation has an end. Depth should be an invitation,
never an obligation to keep scrolling.
05 / Human judgment
AI assists. People decide.
We plan to use AI to organize reporting, identify candidate events
and connections, compare updates, and help draft explanations.
Human review will remain responsible for sources, context, and
what gets published.
Independent by intention
A small beginning. A considered direction.
Ekuri is an independent, bootstrapped project founded by Aziz Ulaş.
It is being built by a solo founder around a simple
question: how can we preserve the context that helps people
understand important public-interest stories?