Print and Online Media Ethics Committee of the Media Council of Mongolia organized its regular meeting for the on March 28, 2025.

- Khuree-Tulga school filed a complaint regarding the live broadcast of Neguun.mn titled “The Korean director of Khuree-Tulga school expelled a class of 22 students with their teacher”. It was stated that the parents of the students are ordinary citizens and therefore have the right to express their views on the conduct of the school, but journalists and newsrooms should act professionally. 
The Ethics Committee reviewed the complaint and concluded that the title ”...expelled a class of 22 students with their teacher" misrepresented and distorted the situation, risking public misperception and exaggerating what really happened, and thus principle 1.3 was violated. 
However, according to the live broadcast, the journalist asked questions from the school translator to clarify and confirm the parents' statements, expressed the assumptions based on the parents' statements, and sought a response from the school administration, providing balance. Also, the video shown was in the workplace cannot be considered as a “personal video. Therefore, it is concluded that principles 1.1, 1.5, 1.6, and 2.3  were not violated.

- Following articles were published subsequently: On February 12, "Oyu Tolgoi bid theft series 1: “10 percent DULAMSUREN's deceit that puts the lives of 10 thousand Mongolian employees at stake, February 13, ” Deceit series around Oyu Tolgoi LLC 2: Executive of Uujimod, Erdene-Ochir.B and three major Oyu Tolgoi directors have been given “shares” for many years, making a history”, February 14, “Episode 3: Oyu Tolgoi directors' bid theft of 50 million dollar
These articles were published by asu.mn, ubn.mn, zuv.mn, tsahiur.mn, and paparazzi.mn . Oyu Tolgoi LLC filed a complaint to MCM that the newsrooms violated principles 1.1, 1.2, 1.8 of media ethics. Newsrooms were accused of using the names of the company's executives in these articles and disseminating completely unsubstantiated information that Oyu Tolgoi is trying to disclose the information of the bidding companies, giving advantages to some suppliers, and receive bonuses from procurement, and forcibly move Mongolian employees to Khanbogd Soum to give an advantage for a certain company. The Ethics Committee asked the complainant to provide evidence refuting the allegations within 14 days. No evidence was submitted by the deadline.
The newsroom had submitted a response and that the articles had been published in connection with a possible conflict of interest related to the activities of Oyu Tolgoi in accordance with the information provided by the source. In addition, the articles were published to address concerns about potential damage to businesses and individuals about the company's activities, which were based on the specific facts provided by an anonymous source, the newsroom called Oyu Tolgoi's publicly available phones to request information but they did not pick up their phones or respond. Therefore, it was said that the first articles were published to prevent the continuation of the process of violation of the rights of enterprises and citizens.
After review, the Ethics Committee concluded that the newsrooms did not violate media ethics, as the complainant failed to provide counter-evidence, and the sources were responsibly used and kept anonymous due to safety concerns.