Ownership and Material Connection Disclosure | Red Light Therapy Mask Reviews

Current status

As of the last update to this page, we hold no ownership interest, financial interest, consulting relationship or sponsorship arrangement with any manufacturer, brand or retailer of red light therapy devices. No product on this site has been supplied free of charge, because no product has yet been reviewed.

If any of that changes, this page changes first, and the change is dated.

What counts as a material connection

We treat all of the following as material connections requiring disclosure:

Ownership interest — the site owner, editor or a reviewer holds equity in a brand.
Financial interest — a stake in a product’s commercial success beyond ordinary affiliate commission.
Consulting relationship — paid or unpaid advisory work for a brand, past or present.
Free product — a unit supplied at no cost and kept.
Loaned product — a unit supplied for testing and returned.
Sponsorship — payment for work on this site from a company we cover.
Anything else a reasonable reader would want to know before weighing our conclusion.

Family and household relationships count. So does a relationship that ended recently enough to matter — we disclose those with dates rather than quietly letting them lapse.

Where a disclosure must appear

This is the part that most sites get wrong, so we are specific about it.

A footer line is not sufficient for a product we are connected to. When a material connection exists, the disclosure appears:

At the top of that product’s review, in a bordered box, above the specifications and above any purchase link — not below the fold, not in small print at the end.
On every ranking, comparison or best-of page that includes the product, attached to that product’s entry, so a reader who never opens the review still sees it.
On this page, in a list of current relationships.

The disclosure names the relationship rather than gesturing at it. “This unit was supplied free of charge by the manufacturer” is a disclosure. “We sometimes work with brands” is not.

What a disclosure does not do

A disclosure does not make a conflicted review neutral. It gives you the information to discount it. Where we hold an ownership or financial interest in a brand, you should read our assessment of that brand’s products with that firmly in mind — that is the entire point of telling you.

For that reason we also apply a harder rule to ourselves: a product in which the site owner holds an ownership or financial interest is not eligible for a “Best Overall” or category award, however it scores. It can be reviewed, and the review will report what we found, but we will not hand a top recommendation to something we profit from twice.

Free and loaned units

Where budget allows, we buy units at retail. Where a manufacturer supplies one:

We do not accept conditions on the review — no approval, no embargo contingent on tone, no pre-publication sight.
The supply is disclosed as described above.
Loaned units are returned; kept units are disclosed as kept.
The manufacturer’s involvement ends at handing over the hardware.

If a brand attaches conditions after supplying a unit, we return it and publish the fact.

Reporting a relationship we have not disclosed

If you have reason to believe someone connected with this site has an undisclosed relationship with a brand we cover, tell us. See the contact page. We would rather investigate an incorrect report than leave a real one unexamined.

Editorial policy — how reviews are produced and what brands cannot influence.
Affiliate disclosure — how commission works and what it does not buy.
Review methodology — how conflicts are handled inside the scoring process.