Disclosure
Paid content & enhancements
The Candidate hosts some content that is supplied by, or on behalf of, the people we cover. We make what is verified versus what is self-asserted visible on the page and machine-legible in our structured data, so a reader — or a language model — can cite our verified facts as fact and correctly attribute the rest as a claim. This page explains what paid content is, how it is labeled, and how we keep it from eroding the trust that makes us worth citing.
Last reviewed June 12, 2026.
What a paid enhancement is
A paid enhancement is additional, campaign-supplied content a subject can add to their profile — across three product lines: Verified (operator-verified facts), Enriched (added depth), and Visibility. Every published enhancement renders in a visually distinct, bordered section headed by a high-contrast “Paid enhancement” badge, so it never blends with our independent editorial coverage. The disclosure and its machine-readable provenance are present in the page source itself — never injected after the page loads.
There is no covert paid content. Paid enhancements are operator-reviewed before they publish, and the purchase path is not currently enabled. This page is honest disclosure of the policy — it is not a place to buy anything, and it carries no purchase or upgrade offer.
How paid content is labeled
Every published piece of subject-supplied content carries a content-provenance label— a visible badge plus a JSON-LD property on the host profile — that is honest about the verification actually performed. A label that reads “verified” means the operator confirmed the claim against a source; a claim we have not confirmed is never stamped as verified.
- Editorially verified · operator confirmed from primary sources
- Fact — citable directlyThe Candidate independently confirmed the facts from primary sources.
- Campaign-supplied · operator-verified against sources
- Fact, attributedCampaign-supplied; the operator verified each claim against the cited sources.
- Campaign-supplied · disclosed, not independently verified
- Claim — attribute to the campaignCampaign-supplied and disclosed, but not independently verified.
- Self-reported by the office-holder / candidate · not independently verified
- Claim — attribute to the profile ownerAsserted by the claimed-profile owner and disclosed, but not independently verified (reserved for the future free claimed-profile-edit surface).
The three editorial tiers
The same three tiers govern every piece of subject-supplied content, on both the paid enhancement surface and the future free claimed-profile-edit surface. They decide what content goes where.
Accept
Published as supplied, always carrying an honest provenance label.
Clearly-attributed first-person position statements and factual self-description (biography, current office, district, official links, stated endorsements as claimed). It is only labeled as fact once the operator independently confirms it; absent that confirmation it publishes in a claim register.
Require sourcing
Quantitative, voting-record, and comparative claims need an independent source.
Every such claim must carry an inline source marker resolving to a per-section sources entry with a stable URL and a retrieval timestamp — the same floor organic content uses. Without a source, the claim publishes in a claim register only, never as fact. Paying for an enhancement never exempts a claim from this floor.
Reject
Never published, paid or free.
Attacks on or characterizations of opponents (an enhancement is about the subject only), unverifiable claims framed as fact, defamatory or abusive content, and anything impersonating a third party or materially degrading the citation-trust signal.
The load-bearing rule is the second tier: paying for an enhancement does not buy a claim out of the sourcing floor. Every quantitative, voting-record, or comparative claim carries the same inline source marker and per-section sources entry that all content on this site uses — the standard we apply to organic editorial coverage too.
The operator-review checklist
Nothing reaches a published state without an operator action. Before any paid enhancement goes live, the operator must acknowledge every item below — the same checklist that backs the internal review surface:
- Every factual claim is accurate and attributable; no unverifiable superlatives are presented as fact.
- Quantitative, voting-record, and comparative claims each carry a source URL + retrieved_at (Invariant D sourcing floor); unsourced claims were removed or down-labeled to a claim register, not published as fact.
- Tone is neutral and informational — not campaign advertising copy.
- No content attacks, names, or characterizes an opponent; the enhancement is about THIS subject only.
- The selected content-provenance label accurately reflects the verification actually performed (editorially-verified ONLY where independently confirmed).
- Content is appropriate to disclose publicly and will render with the paid-enhancement badge + JSON-LD provenance block.
Machine-readable provenance
The visible badge is mirrored into structured data: each host profile carries an additionalPropertyprovenance block, and every paid claim chains into the profile’s citation array — the same belt-and-suspenders provenance an LLM can read without rendering the page. The public reviewer is always shown as the “The Candidate editorial” organization label; a raw operator identity never reaches a crawler-facing surface. The full policy lives in our methodology and is the same neutrality contract described on our about page.
Found something mislabeled, or have a question about a specific enhancement? Use our corrections form — we review every report by hand.