This page explains how articles on Heresthebest are produced. It is meant to be specific, not aspirational. We update this page when our process changes, with a "last updated" date at the bottom.
How we choose topics
We publish an article when we can answer at least three of these questions clearly:
- Is there a concrete decision behind this topic, or is it just a category?
- Is there public data, pricing, or documentation that lets us be specific instead of vague?
- Is the current top-ranked content on this topic generic, outdated, or wrong in a way we can correct?
- Will the answer be useful for at least 12 months, or is it news content that decays in a week?
If we cannot answer at least three with "yes", we do not publish. We do not maintain a publishing calendar that forces output regardless of quality. Some weeks we publish three articles. Some weeks we publish none.
We do not publish topics that require first-hand experience we cannot honestly claim. We do not publish hotel reviews, restaurant reviews, destination reviews, product reviews requiring physical possession, or first-person travelogues. These genres exist on other excellent sites; they are not our format.
How we research
Each article begins with a research document containing:
- The specific question the article answers, written as one sentence.
- The decision the reader is trying to make, written as a second sentence.
- A list of primary sources we expect to consult: official documentation, regulatory bodies, manufacturer or service-provider pricing pages, institutional reports such as UNWTO, IATA, OECD, Eurostat, JNTO, Statista when the underlying source is verifiable, and academic studies where relevant.
- A list of competing perspectives or counter-arguments we will address.
We prioritize primary sources over secondary reporting. When we cite a price, we cite the page on the vendor’s own site. When we cite a regulation, we cite the regulatory text. When we cite an industry statistic, we cite the underlying report, not a blog post quoting the report.
When primary sources disagree, we say so in the article, cite both, and explain which we weight more heavily and why.
How we use AI tools
We use AI tools, including large language models, search assistants, and research aggregators, at multiple stages of the editorial process:
- Initial research synthesis – surfacing relevant primary sources and pulling out structured data we then verify against the original.
- Drafting assistance – generating first-pass structure, tables, and prose that human editors then revise heavily.
- Editorial review – checking drafts for internal consistency, missing context, and unclear passages.
- Fact-check support – flagging claims that need source verification.
We treat AI tools the same way we treat spreadsheets and search engines: useful for specific tasks, never a substitute for editorial judgment. Every AI-assisted draft is reviewed by a human editor against primary sources before publication. The editorial responsibility for every published article rests with our team, not with any AI system.
What this means in practice:
- We do not publish articles that have not been read, edited, and fact-checked by a human.
- We do not publish AI-generated tables of "recommended products" without verifying each recommendation against current pricing and feature documentation.
- We do not publish first-person experience claims, AI-generated or otherwise, that are not true.
- We disclose AI assistance as part of our standard process, not as a per-article disclaimer.
How we cite sources
Every article ends with a Sources section. Minimum standards:
- At least four primary sources for any guide longer than 1,500 words.
- At least one source per major claim, such as pricing, regulation, or statistical figure.
- Direct links to the source page, not to aggregators or affiliates.
- For prices and time-sensitive figures, the date of verification.
If a source is paywalled, we say so. If a source is in a language other than English, we note the language and, where possible, link to an official English translation.
How we publish prices
Pricing is the most time-sensitive content on the site. We follow three rules:
- Cite the official pricing page. No third-party pricing roundups.
- Include the date the price was verified. Format: "As of 2026-05-15, source: vendor.com/pricing".
- Re-verify on a schedule. Articles where pricing is central are reviewed quarterly. Comparison tables show the most recent verification date.
When a vendor changes prices, we update the affected articles within 14 days and add a brief note to the changelog at the bottom of the article.
How we handle conflicts of interest
We disclose:
- Any affiliate relationship with a product or service mentioned in an article.
- Any sponsored or paid relationship with a vendor. We currently have none.
- Any personal use or paid subscription by editorial team members to a tool being reviewed. This is normal and acceptable; we just say so.
We do not:
- Accept payment for inclusion in comparative guides or "best of" lists.
- Allow vendors to review or approve coverage before publication.
- Remove negative coverage of a vendor in exchange for affiliate revenue.
How we update articles
Articles fall into three update categories:
Evergreen frameworks – decision rules, methodology articles, glossaries – reviewed annually, with minor updates as needed.
Comparative guides with pricing – reviewed quarterly. Pricing tables are updated to the most recent verification date. Major changes, such as vendor pricing increases, new entrants, or discontinued products, trigger an article update within 14 days.
Trend pieces – reviewed annually. After 18 months, a trend piece is either rewritten, replaced, or marked as historical and noindexed.
Every update to an article appears in the article’s changelog at the bottom, with the date and a one-sentence summary of what changed.
How we handle errors
When we identify or are informed of a factual error:
- We verify the error against primary sources.
- If confirmed, we update the article with the correct information.
- We add a Corrections note at the top or bottom of the article explaining what was wrong and what it has been changed to.
- We log the correction publicly on the Corrections Policy page.
Errors of opinion or interpretation are addressed in the comments or via direct email. Errors of fact are corrected with a public note.
Editorial team
Heresthebest is produced by a small editorial team. We do not publish individual bylines on most articles because the editorial responsibility is shared: every article is researched, drafted, reviewed, fact-checked, and edited by multiple members of the team before publication. This is the same model used by Wirecutter, Consumer Reports’ guides, and most institutional editorial operations.
If you need to reach a specific editor for corrections or content questions, email [email protected] and we will route your message to the relevant person.
What we do not claim
To be explicit about the limits of our work:
- We are not a financial advisor. Articles about pricing, costs, or affordability are general guidance, not personalized financial advice.
- We are not a legal advisor. Articles about regulations, consumer rights, or compliance are research summaries, not legal advice. Where the stakes are high, such as visa rules, tax implications, or contracts, consult a qualified professional.
- We are not a medical or psychological advisor. We do not publish health, medical, or mental health content.
- We do not have first-hand experience with every product, service, or destination we cover. We say so when it matters.
Last updated: 2026-05-26. This methodology document is reviewed and updated when our process changes materially.