Editorial policy behind our adult ad network research

Last updated: 31 July 2026

This page describes how material on this site is researched, checked, published and corrected. It exists so that a reader can judge our work by its method rather than by its confidence. Everything below is the standard we hold ourselves to, and the section on corrections tells you what to do when we fall short of it.

Four principles

Accuracy over completeness. A page with fewer figures that are all correct is worth more than a page with everything and three errors. Where we cannot verify something, we say we could not verify it instead of filling the gap with a plausible estimate.

Independence from commercial relationships. Being a commercial partner buys a network a place in the comparison on the same terms as everyone else. It does not buy a favourable description, the removal of a limitation, or the absence of a competitor.

Transparency about sourcing. Every reader should be able to tell where a number came from. Figures taken from a platform's own documentation and figures taken from a third-party directory carry different weight, and the text distinguishes them.

Currency. Deposit floors, formats, payout thresholds and legal conditions all change. A page that was right in January and untouched since is not a reliable page, so we date the check rather than the publication.

How a page is produced

Step 1 — Scope

We start from the decision a reader is trying to make, not from a keyword. For a comparison page that means deciding which platforms belong in the table and which columns actually change the decision. Columns that cannot be verified from a primary source do not go in, however good they would look.

Step 2 — Primary research

Figures come from the platform. We open a free advertiser account, read the funding page with the intended payment method selected, count formats in the campaign creation flow, and read payout terms on the publisher side. Legal material comes from court opinions, statute text and regulator or platform policy pages.

Step 3 — Cross-checking against secondary sources

We read the industry directories, but as a subject rather than a source. Where a directory disagrees with a platform's own page, that disagreement is often the most useful thing on the page, and we publish it with both numbers instead of silently picking one.

Step 4 — Writing

The person who did the checking writes the section. This is not a stylistic preference. It keeps the caveats attached to the figures, because the writer knows which numbers were solid and which took three attempts to pin down.

Step 5 — Verification pass

Before publication every figure is matched back to its source, and anything without one is either removed or explicitly marked as unverified. We also test the negative case: if a competitor's brand were substituted for ours throughout the text, would the page still read as true? If it would, the page is generic and goes back for rewriting.

Step 6 — Publication and review

Pages carry a named author and the date the figures were last checked. Comparison material is re-verified on a fixed cadence and immediately when a platform announces a change to deposits, formats, payment methods or payout terms.

Sourcing rules

We rank sources in a fixed order, and a lower-ranked source never overrides a higher one.

1. Primary documents. Court opinions, statute text, regulator publications, and a platform's own documentation, help centre and funding pages. These are the only sources we treat as authoritative on their own.
2. Direct observation. What we can see inside an account: format lists, deposit screens, payout settings. Recorded with the date observed, because these change without notice.
3. Attributed third-party reporting. News coverage and company statements, used for the fact that something happened and cited as such.
4. Directory listings and competitor reviews. Not a source. We read them to find claims worth checking, and any figure that exists only here is labelled as directory-sourced in the text.

Where two primary sources conflict, we publish the conflict rather than resolve it silently. A platform's marketing page saying one thing and its terms saying another is information the reader needs.

Editorial independence and commercial relationships

This site is funded by affiliate commissions. One of the platforms in our comparison material is a commercial partner, and the page carrying that comparison says so where the reader will see it.

Three rules keep the money away from the judgement. No platform sees a page before publication or has any right of review. No platform can pay for placement, for the removal of a competitor, or for the removal of a documented limitation. And the same factual columns apply to every entry in a table, with no scores, weightings or rankings that could be tuned to produce a preferred result.

In practice this means our partner's weaknesses are printed on the same page as its strengths, and the strengths of platforms that pay us nothing are printed there too. A comparison in which one participant has no drawbacks is not a comparison, and readers recognise that faster than algorithms do.

Use of AI tools

We use AI tools for research assistance, drafting and editing, in the same way a newsroom uses a search engine and a copy editor. We do not use them as a source. No figure enters a page because a model produced it; every number is verified against the primary sources described above before publication, and a named human is accountable for the result.

Corrections

When we get something wrong we fix the page and say what changed. Substantive corrections, meaning anything that could have changed a reader's decision, are noted on the page along with the date. Typographical fixes are made silently.

To report an error, write to [email protected] with the page address and the specific figure or claim. It helps enormously if you can point at the source that contradicts us. We aim to respond within two business days and to correct verified errors within five.

What we do not publish

These rules are applied to every page on Adult Ad Network. We do not publish sponsored articles, paid placements dressed as editorial, or content written by a platform's marketing team. We do not publish scores or rankings. We do not publish invented performance data, including test results attributed to a named author who did not run the test. And we do not publish anything about the adult content industry beyond the advertising infrastructure that is our subject.

The broader background to this work is on the about page, and the person responsible for it is described on the author page. The legal terms covering use of this material are on the terms and conditions page, what we store in your browser is disclosed on the cookie policy page, and corrections go through the addresses on the contact page.