Skip to main content

Independent affiliate publishing researcheditorial SEO systemscomparison-page standards

Sources checked

Explore the Blueprint

Blueprint module

Editorial Governance

Governance is what makes a review site trustworthy over time: who checks what, how evidence is recorded, and how changes and corrections are shown to readers.

Google asks creators to make clear who wrote content, how it was produced and why it exists, and warns against "fabricating creator profiles". Governance turns those questions into routine: named owners, evidence logs, update triggers and visible corrections.

Guides

Editorial governance

Editorial Update Systems for Review Sites

An update system for iGaming affiliate reviews built on event triggers, page owners, review intervals and a public change log, with examples of 2025 and 2026 regulatory changes in Great Britain, Germany and Ontario that should trigger edits.

Editorial governance

Review Evidence Checklist

A checklist that classifies every claim in a casino or sportsbook review as tested, cited or unsupported, based on Google's high quality review guidance, the FTC Endorsement Guides and the 2024 FTC rule on consumer reviews.

Editorial governance

Explaining Bonus Terms Without Misleading Readers

A framework for explaining casino and sportsbook bonus terms on affiliate sites by market, covering Great Britain's 10x wagering cap and mixed-product ban, Ontario's ban on public inducement advertising, Germany's advertising limits under GlüStV 2021 and the US state approach.

Governance checklist

Governance records every review site should keep
RecordOwnerShown to readers?
Byline and author page with real backgroundEditor in chiefYes
Methodology and scoring rubricEditor in chiefYes
Evidence log per reviewPage ownerSummary on page
Update triggers and review datesPage ownerLast updated date and change log
Corrections logEditor in chiefYes, on the affected page
Commercial relationships registerCommercial leadDisclosure page

Questions

Do reviews need a named author?

Google recommends clear authorship, such as bylines that lead to background information, and warns against fabricated profiles. Use real people or an honest desk byline.

Should AI use be disclosed?

Google asks whether the use of automation, including AI generation, is self-evident to visitors through disclosures or in other ways. State how drafts are produced and checked.

Who should own corrections?

One senior editor, with a public log on each affected page.

Sources

  1. Google Search Central, Creating helpful, reliable, people-first content, last updated October 5, 2026.

Questions about your affiliate publishing system?

Send the editors a question, a source or a correction. A person reads every message.