Editorial

Editorial Policy

Everything we publish is written to help operators make better decisions. This policy explains how we source it, who reviews it, and how we correct it when we get something wrong.

Last reviewed

Our principles

  • Accuracy. Every factual claim is sourced. Where we cite statistics, the source and year are linked inline.
  • Independence. Search Scope is funded by client work. We do not accept advertising, sponsorships, paid placements, or affiliate revenue on this site.
  • Accountability. If we get something wrong, we correct it visibly — see the Corrections section below.
  • Operator focus. Content is written for the people running the business or the campaign, not for academic completeness.
  • Privacy. Client examples, screenshots, and results are only published with explicit written consent. Sensitive figures are anonymised by default.

How we source content

Every guide, statistics piece, and tactical breakdown draws on three sources: Search Scope's own client casework (with permission), primary sources (Google, Microsoft, Apple official documentation, government data, peer-reviewed research), and reputable industry publications.

We do not source from undisclosed AI training data, paraphrase competitors without attribution, or republish third-party charts without licence.

Use of AI

We use AI tools — primarily Claude and ChatGPT — for first-draft outlines, transcript cleanup, and code/schema generation. Every published piece is reviewed, edited, fact-checked, and re-written by a human (almost always Dorian). No piece on this site is AI-generated end-to-end and shipped without human editorial pass.

We do not use AI to fabricate quotes, citations, or statistics. If a piece reports a figure, the figure exists in the cited source and a human verified it.

Fact-checking

Every claim that includes a number, a date, a quote, or a "Google says" assertion is checked against a primary source before publication. Editorial pieces older than 12 months are flagged for review and either updated, dated as historical, or unpublished.

Editorial process

  1. Research. Casework, primary sources, and competitor coverage are gathered into a brief.
  2. Draft. Written by Dorian or a named contributor. AI may assist with structure or formatting.
  3. Edit. A second pass for accuracy, balance, accessibility, tone, and brand voice.
  4. Approve. Founder sign-off for any piece touching strategy, pricing, or named clients.
  5. Review. Significant pieces re-reviewed annually; everything else every two years.

Corrections and updates

When we discover an error, we correct it as soon as practical and add a dated correction note at the top or bottom of the piece. Substantive corrections — wrong figure, wrong source, wrong claim — are flagged explicitly. Typo fixes and minor wording changes are made silently.

To report an error, email [email protected] with the URL and what's wrong. We respond within five business days.

Contributors

Most content on this site is written by Dorian Menard. Occasional contributors are named at the top of their piece with a short bio and disclosure of any commercial relationships. We do not publish anonymous content, ghost-written content under Dorian's name, or content provided by external PR teams without disclosure.

Conflicts of interest

If a piece references a client, a partner, or a tool we have a commercial relationship with, the relationship is disclosed inline. If we recommend a tool or platform on this site, we are not being paid to do so.

Contact

Questions about this policy, or want to flag an error? Email [email protected].