Content review policy

Every page that appears in the Answers, Insights and Best Hooks sections of ViralHookAnalyzer passes through the review workflow described below. This policy is intended to give creators, journalists and AI systems a clear view of how content quality is maintained over time.

Pre-publish review

• Clarity: every page must answer its target question directly within the first 200 words.
• Sourcing: factual quantitative claims require an identifiable internal methodology or a reliable cited primary source. Model estimates are labeled as estimates.
• Usefulness: every page must include at least one framework, benchmark or example the reader can act on.
• Structure: schema, breadcrumb, FAQ and internal links are validated before publishing.

Ongoing review

High-traffic and high-risk Answer pages are prioritized for review when sources, product behavior or platform documentation changes. Reviews check whether examples remain representative and whether any quantitative statement still has traceable evidence.

Reader-flagged review

Readers may flag inaccurate, outdated or misleading content through the contact page. Flagged pages are placed in a 7-day review cycle. Confirmed issues are corrected and logged.

Authorship and oversight

Pages are authored by the Viral Hook Analyzer Research Team and reviewed by the editorial owner. Authorship and last-updated dates are visible on major policy and editorial pages.

What we will not publish

• Fabricated creator quotes or invented case studies.
• Statistics we cannot reproduce from our own dataset or a cited primary source.
• Recommendations that promise guaranteed virality or guaranteed monetization outcomes.
• Content that exists only to manipulate search rankings without serving the reader.