Trust isn't claimed.
It's earned, in public.
Four principles govern everything we publish: independence, sourcing, disclosure, corrections. The methodology tells you how we test; this page tells you how we publish — and what to do when we get something wrong.
The four commitments.
Editorial independence is non-negotiable.
No advertiser, no manufacturer, and no commercial partner sees a review before it's published. Manufacturers are not given the chance to review accuracy, contest a score, or change a quote. Loaner devices are returned at the manufacturer's expense within 30 days of review publication. Press trips are declined; we pay for our own travel.
- Manufacturers do not preview drafts or quotes
- Editors have no equity, options, or paid relationships with phone makers
- No editor accepts gifts, swag, or hospitality from a covered company
Every claim has a source. Every source is named.
Unverified leaks are labeled as rumors with their original source attributed. Anonymous sources are used only when the public-interest threshold is met and the editor-in-chief has personally verified the source's identity and reliability. We do not republish vendor PR as journalism.
- Every factual claim is traceable to a measurement, primary source, or named expert
- Anonymous sources require editor-in-chief sign-off and a dated identity verification
- Press releases are summarized as PR, not rewritten as reporting
Affiliate revenue is disclosed on every link.
Every purchase link is marked as a commission-generating link. Affiliate revenue does not influence which products get recommended, in what order, or with what score. Editors are paid a fixed salary; no editor sees revenue-per-device data. Annual revenue split by manufacturer is published in the company financial summary.
- Every affiliate link is wrapped, disclosed, and marked rel="sponsored"
- Editor compensation is fixed and decoupled from commercial performance
- Annual revenue-by-brand summary published in Q1 of the following year
When we get something wrong, we say so.
Every correction is appended to the original article with a dated note explaining what changed. Material errors trigger a re-test and, where warranted, a score revision. We do not silently update articles. The public corrections log below contains every correction we've issued in the last 90 days.
- Corrections appended to articles in a dated, persistent note
- Material errors trigger re-test + score recomputation
- Public 90-day corrections log, never pruned
How an article ships.
Public corrections log.
Every correction is also appended to the original article as a dated note. We do not silently update content. The log above is never pruned.
Who's on the record.
Industry leaks, insider intel, off-the-record context. Anonymous tips accepted via SecureDrop. We protect sources.
Spotted a factual error? Tell us. Every report gets reviewed; verified corrections are appended to the article with a dated note.
Concerns about editorial independence, undisclosed conflicts, or anything that doesn't feel above-board. Reaches the editor-in-chief directly.
Embargoed releases, review unit requests, comment requests. We do not accept embargoed-without-review terms.
12 years in tech journalism. Methodology architect since 2023. Final sign-off on all material corrections.
9 years editorial standards work. Owns the corrections workflow and the public log. Reviews every disclosure flag.
7 years measurement-driven reviews. Owns every instrument protocol and the annual third-party audit relationship.
Sarah Chen · Editor-in-Chief
Final sign-off on this document · 12 APR 2026