Editorial standard

Honest-favorable

We are in the business of recommending products. Readers know that, and they can tell when a review is pretending otherwise. So our rule is simple: we lean favorable when a product deserves it, and we are critical when it does not. Every review leads with real strengths and names at least one real caveat.

A review with zero downsides reads like an advertisement, and Google has been progressively deranking sites that publish those. Being honest about limitations is both the right thing to do and the thing that compounds.

What we never do

• No fabrication. We do not invent features, benefits, statistics, study results, testimonials, or user quotes. If we do not know something, we do not write it.
• No fake first-person. We do not claim to have tested a product we have not tested. Our reviews are analysis-driven, based on vendor materials, pricing, refund policies, and publicly available feedback. When we have genuine hands-on experience with a product, we say so.
• No medical, financial, or income guarantees. ClickBank supplements are not FDA-approved, ClickBank programs do not guarantee weight loss, and ClickBank courses do not guarantee income. If a vendor makes those claims, we present them as vendor claims, not endorsements.
• No urgency manipulation. No fake scarcity, no fake countdowns, no “price doubles at midnight” pressure language.
• No covering obvious scams. If a product looks deceptive or predatory, we skip it. Skipping a commission is cheaper than losing reader trust.

Our review process

1. Source. We pick products from the ClickBank marketplace based on reader demand, workable commissions, and whether we can say something genuinely useful about them.
2. Research. We collect the vendor's claims, pricing, upsells, rebills, refund window, target audience, common praises, and common complaints from public feedback.
3. Write. We produce an analysis-driven review that follows this standard.
4. QA. Every draft is run through an automated editorial check that blocks publishing if the disclosure is missing, if the review contains fabricated first-person testing language, if it makes forbidden medical or income claims, or if it fails basic structural requirements.
5. Publish. Only drafts that pass the gate make it into the library. We update sitemap and schema on publish.
6. Correct. If a reader tells us something is wrong, we fix it. We would rather correct a page than defend a stale take.

Affiliate disclosure

ClickRank is an affiliate of ClickBank vendors. When you buy a product through a link on this site, we earn a commission. That commission funds the site. It does not determine which products we cover, and it does not determine how we rate them.

Every page with affiliate links carries a clear disclosure at the top of the page, within the review body, and in the site footer. Outbound affiliate links are tagged with rel="sponsored nofollow noopener" and open in a new tab.

This follows the U.S. Federal Trade Commission's guidelines for endorsements and testimonials. If you think we have missed a disclosure somewhere on the site, email us and we will correct it.

Use of AI in our workflow

We use AI tooling to help with research and drafting. We are transparent about this because the alternative, pretending otherwise, is the kind of thing this standard exists to prevent.

Every draft, regardless of how it was written, must pass the same editorial QA gate: disclosure present, no fabricated testing, no forbidden claims, honest caveats included. A draft that fails the gate does not get published, full stop.

Corrections

If you spot an inaccuracy, a missing disclosure, a misattributed claim, or anything else on the site that is wrong, please email us through the contact page. We respond to every correction request, and if you are right, we update the page.