Editorial Standards & Legal Framework

How we report,
what we claim,
and how to challenge us

Traced makes specific, sourced claims about named companies. This page explains exactly what those claims are based on, what they are not, and how brands or individuals can request corrections.

Scores are editorial opinion, not legal findings

Traced scores are independent editorial assessments based on our analysis of publicly available information. A Low Transparency score means we have found, in our editorial judgment, that a brand scores poorly on our published 7-dimension transparency rubric. It does not mean:

— That the brand's products are unsafe or harmful
— That the brand has violated any law
— That consumers should not purchase the brand's products
— That any regulatory agency has found violations (unless we specifically cite one)

Where Traced reports on documented government actions — FDA warning letters, FTC settlements, SEC filings, court judgments — those are factual reports of public record. Where Traced characterizes a brand's practices, those are editorial opinions based on disclosed facts, and we label them as such.

The legal distinction that matters

Under U.S. defamation law, statements of pure opinion are constitutionally protected. Statements of fact that can be proven true or false carry a higher standard. Traced's score characterizations are editorial opinion. Our underlying factual claims — acquisition dates, prices, ingredient substitutions, regulatory actions — are statements of fact that we source to primary documents. If a factual claim is wrong, we correct it. If a characterization is disputed, we consider the challenge and update our editorial reasoning where warranted.

What we cite and why it matters

Every specific factual claim in a Traced investigation is sourced to a document we have reviewed. We classify sources into three tiers, and we prefer higher-tier sources wherever they are available.

Tier 1 — Primary
Original documents
SEC filings (8-K, 10-K, proxy statements) · FDA letters and recall notices · FTC consent orders and complaints · Court filings and settlement records · Investor call transcripts · Current product labels and COAs · Company press releases
Tier 2 — Secondary
Published research & journalism
Peer-reviewed studies (PubMed, Nature, NEJM) · Investigative journalism from major outlets · Consumer Reports product testing · Industry databases (FoodData Central, EWG)
Tier 3 — Contextual
Background & context
Industry news coverage · Brand marketing materials · Historical packaging records · Third-party market analysis

Tier 3 sources are never used to support specific factual claims about a brand's practices. They provide context only. Tier 1 sources are linked or cited by document name and date wherever possible.

What Traced explicitly does not claim

No safety ratings
We do not evaluate product safety
Traced scores measure transparency practices — disclosure, ownership clarity, ingredient sourcing visibility. A Low Transparency score does not mean a product is unsafe. Safety evaluation requires laboratory testing and regulatory expertise that Traced does not perform.
No legal conclusions
We do not conclude brands have broken laws
Where we report on FTC actions, FDA letters, or settlements, we report the documented regulatory record. We do not characterize conduct as illegal unless a court or regulatory body has made that finding and we are citing that finding specifically.
No purchase advice
We do not tell consumers what to buy
Traced surfaces information. Purchasing decisions involve personal values, budgets, dietary needs, and preferences that Traced does not evaluate. Our job is to make the information available, not to make the decision.
Score lag
Scores reflect information available at review date
Ownership structures, formulas, and regulatory records change. Each investigation shows a "Last verified" date. A brand's actual current practices may differ from what our score reflects if significant changes have occurred since our last review.

How to request a correction or challenge our reporting

We take factual accuracy seriously. If you believe a Traced investigation contains a factual error — an incorrect acquisition date, an inaccurate ingredient claim, a mischaracterization of a regulatory record — we want to know.

01
Email [email protected] with the specific claim you believe is inaccurate, the investigation URL, and the primary source document you believe contradicts our reporting.
02
We will review the primary source you provide and compare it against our own sourcing. This process typically takes 5–10 business days.
03
If the factual claim is wrong, we will correct it, note the correction with a date at the top of the relevant investigation, and update the score if the correction materially affects our assessment.
04
If the characterization is disputed (not a factual error, but a disagreement with our editorial interpretation), we will note the dispute and consider whether additional context should be added. We are not obligated to change editorial opinions based on brand preference.
05
We do not remove investigations because a brand objects to the score. We remove or correct specific factual errors when they are demonstrated with primary source documentation.
Corrections & editorial challenges
[email protected]

Please include: the investigation URL, the specific claim you believe is inaccurate, and a link or copy of the primary source document supporting your correction. General objections to a score without specific factual disputes will be logged but are unlikely to result in changes.

Our independence policy

Traced does not accept advertising, sponsorship, or affiliate revenue from any food, supplement, or consumer brand. Scores are not for sale. A brand cannot pay to improve its score, remove an investigation, or suppress a finding.

Traced does not have financial relationships with any of the local vendors featured in the Local Discovery section. Vendor profiles reflect our editorial assessment of sourcing practices; they are not paid placements.

If Traced ever introduces revenue streams that could create conflicts — sponsored content, affiliate links, brand partnerships — we will disclose those relationships prominently on the relevant pages and in this policy.

The legal basis for this kind of reporting

Traced's investigations are protected under several well-established legal frameworks:

First Amendment opinion protection. Editorial scores, characterizations, and analytical conclusions are constitutionally protected opinion. The U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held that statements of pure opinion, clearly identified as such, cannot form the basis of a defamation claim.

Fair report privilege. Reports on government actions — FDA recalls, FTC settlements, SEC investigations, court filings — are protected under the fair report privilege when accurately reported from public records.

Truth as absolute defense. For our factual claims — acquisition dates, prices, ingredient substitutions — truth is a complete defense to any defamation claim. We source these claims to primary documents specifically because documented truth is our strongest protection.