Ethics Policy
WikiWalls is sponsorship-funded, no affiliate. Editorial decisions are made by the masthead, not by sponsors. Gifts and loaners are disclosed. Conflicts of interest are disclosed in the piece. The reader’s trust is the asset; we protect it as if our continued existence depends on it, because it does.
- Funding: sponsorship-first revenue model. No affiliate links at any horizon
- Sponsor influence: none on editorial. Sponsors do not see drafts, do not pick reviewers, do not shape methodology, cannot remove negative coverage
- Gifts and loaners: disclosed in the piece. Loaned hardware returned within 30 days of publication unless explicitly retained for ongoing coverage
- Personal conflicts: reviewer holding stock in a company under review recuses or discloses. Personal use of a product disclosed
- What we will not sell: link insertions, editorial influence, removal of negative reviews, advance review access, “do not cover competitor” deals
Funding model
WikiWalls is funded through sponsorships and the Index research-partnership program. We do not run affiliate links. We do not run programmatic display advertising in editorial slots. We do not sell paid placements in our comparison rankings.
Sponsor inventory is structurally separated from editorial inventory: brand spotlight pieces are sponsor-bylined, visually labeled, and live at the /sponsored/ URL prefix. Newsletter sponsor slots sit at the foot of the issue, never above the editorial fold. Founding Sponsor logos appear in clearly labeled brand-presence locations on the homepage footer and sponsors page, never in editorial headlines.
Sponsor influence: where it exists, where it stops
| Decision | Who makes it |
|---|---|
| What we cover | The editor-in-chief and editorial team |
| Methodology of any test | The editor and named reviewer |
| Verdict on any comparison | The named reviewer, blind to sponsor relationships during testing |
| What gets corrected | The editor, per the correction policy |
| Whether to take a sponsor relationship | The editor (veto right) + Head of Sales |
| Branded content topic and angle | Sponsor proposes; editor approves or revises. Sponsor cannot dictate |
| Whether to remove a negative review | Editor only. Commercial pressure does not move this |
| Sponsor logo placement | Brand-presence locations only (homepage footer, /sponsors/ page, designated brand spotlights). Never in editorial headlines |
Gifts and loaners
Hardware sent on loan for testing is disclosed in the piece. The default is: the unit is returned within 30 days of publication. Exceptions (extended retention for ongoing coverage, “keep” review units offered as part of a press program) are disclosed.
Gift and loaner rules
- Loaners are disclosed in the piece. The disclosure block lists the originator, the dates of the loan, and whether the unit is being returned
- Loaners are not free gifts. Items sent for review are returned, donated, or purchased at fair market value if the reviewer wants to keep them
- Cash gifts, paid travel, meals beyond a working coffee: declined
- Sponsored event attendance: covered like any other piece, with explicit disclosure that the event was sponsor-funded
- Speaking honoraria: the masthead member declines or, if accepting, recuses from any coverage that the speaking venue or its competitors would have a direct interest in
Conflicts of interest
Reviewers, editors, and columnists disclose financial holdings, advisory relationships, and personal use that could be material to a piece. The standard: if a reasonable reader would want to know, we disclose.
| Situation | What we do |
|---|---|
| Reviewer holds stock in a company under review | Recuse, or disclose at the top of the piece with rationale for not recusing |
| Reviewer is an advisor / board member of a company under review | Recuse |
| Reviewer uses a product they are reviewing in their day job | Disclose in the piece. Personal use is often what qualifies the reviewer |
| Reviewer was previously employed by a company under review | Disclose if within the last 24 months. Earlier than that, judgment call with editor |
| Spouse / partner / household member works at a company under review | Disclose. Recuse if the family member is in a senior decision-making role |
| Columnist’s personal newsletter is sponsored by a brand we are reviewing | Disclose. Columnist recuses from the specific review piece |
What we will not sell
These are the offers that arrive in inbound revenue conversations and that we decline immediately. The discipline kills 30% of inbound revenue ideas; that is the discipline.
Not for sale: link insertions in existing editorial pieces, editorial influence on methodology or verdict, removal of negative reviews, advance review access ahead of publication, “we will not write about your competitor” deals, sponsored verdict ranking, paid #1 position in comparison rankings.
Sensitive verticals
AI in regulated industries (legal, medical, finance), founder finance, and security claims carry additional discipline. Named credentialed reviewer required for the first two. Defensible threat model required for the third. See editorial standards for the full sensitive-content protocol.
How to report a concern
If a reader believes a piece contains an undisclosed conflict, a factual error, or sponsor-influenced editorial, they can write to contact with the piece URL and the concern. Concerns are reviewed by the editor and a second editor. If a concern is upheld, the piece is corrected per the correction policy, the correction is dated and signed, and material corrections are surfaced on the homepage for 48 hours.
Last reviewed by WikiWalls editorial.