Editorial Standards

Brazilian Beauty Index is published by a company that also imports and distributes several of the brands it writes about. That relationship is unusual for an editorial site and it deserves a straight explanation. This page sets out how we handle it, and the rules our editorial team works to.

1. Editorial independence

The site's editorial team is responsible for what goes on BBI. The commercial teams that run our sister retail and trade sites — Keratin & Care, Braé UK, KAC Pro, BM Supplier — do not have approval rights over articles. They are sometimes asked to fact-check technical claims about a product, in the same way we would ask any manufacturer.

In practice this means:

• If a product we distribute performs poorly in a head-to-head test, we say so.
• If a competing brand we do not distribute is the better choice for a given hair type, we say that too.
• We will not delete or quietly soften a negative review because a brand has complained.
• We will not publish a positive review in exchange for distribution rights, a discount, or anything else.

Where an editor is asked to write about a brand they have a personal stake in — for example, a stylist who consults for the brand on the side — the brief is reassigned to another editor.

2. Methodology — how we test and review

Reviews on BBI fall into three formats. We label each so readers know what they are reading.

For hands-on tests:

• We disclose how the product was obtained — bought at retail, sample sent by the brand, supplied via our distribution channel.
• We disclose hair or skin type, baseline condition, and any concurrent products that could affect the result.
• Where a single editor's hair is not representative (almost always), we say so and avoid universal claims.

3. Fact-checking

Every article goes through a basic fact-check before publication:

• Brand names, country of origin, ownership and founding dates are checked against an official source (the brand's own site, Companies House equivalent, or a peer-reviewed reference).
• Ingredient claims are checked against the INCI list on the product label, the manufacturer technical sheet, or the CosIng database (EU Cosmetic Ingredients).
• Regulatory claims (formaldehyde limits, CBD legality, prescription-only status) are checked against the relevant regulator — MHRA, ASA, ECHA, FDA, ANVISA in Brazil.
• Statistics and study references are linked to the original source, with the date of the study.
• Direct quotes from interviews are signed off by the interviewee where possible.

For reviews and investigations, a second editor reviews the draft before publication. For straightforward reference guides, the writing editor self-checks against the source list.

4. Sources and citations

We aim to link to primary sources, not aggregators. Preference order:

1. The brand's own technical documentation or official statement.
2. A regulator (MHRA, ASA, EU CosIng, ECHA, ANVISA).
3. A peer-reviewed paper, with the journal and DOI.
4. A trade publication with a named author and clear methodology.
5. Other consumer media, where the claim is uncontroversial and well-attributed.

We do not cite anonymous user reviews, AI-generated content from other sites, or social posts whose authorship cannot be verified. Where we report something we cannot fully verify, we say so explicitly ("the brand says…", "according to packaging dated…").

5. Author identification and bylines

Every editorial article carries the name of the writer or editor responsible. Where appropriate, we also list:

• the editor who reviewed it;
• the professional credentials of the writer where these are relevant (e.g. trichology qualification, salon experience);
• the date of original publication and the date of the last substantive update.

Where a contributor writes under a pen name (for example, for safety or privacy reasons), this is flagged on the article and the editor of record is named instead.

6. Conflict of interest disclosure

The biggest standing conflict of interest is that BBI's operator distributes some of the brands we cover. That is disclosed on every article that mentions an in-portfolio brand, with a short line:

Other conflicts we disclose:

• Travel, accommodation or training paid for by a brand for an editor or contributor.
• Product samples worth over £100 that were not bought at retail.
• Any personal commercial relationship between a writer and a brand (consulting, ambassadorship, affiliate code).

Editors maintain a written register of interests, refreshed every six months. The register is held internally; specific disclosures appear on the relevant articles.

7. Sponsored content labelling

From time to time we publish content paid for by a brand. When we do, the article is clearly marked. We follow the UK Code of Non-broadcast Advertising and Direct & Promotional Marketing (the CAP Code) and the ASA guidance on "ad" labelling.

8. Image rights and attribution

Photography on BBI comes from several places. Each has its own attribution rule, which we follow:

• Original photography commissioned or produced by BBI — credited "Photo: Brazilian Beauty Index" and used freely on the site.
• Brand imagery supplied by the manufacturer — used with permission, credited to the brand.
• Unsplash and similar libraries — used under the relevant licence; photographer credited inline as required, even when the licence does not strictly require it.
• Editorial use of brand packaging or catalogue pages — used as commentary or journalism under fair dealing (Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, sections 30 and 30A), with the brand identified clearly.
• Reader-submitted photos — used only where the reader has confirmed they own the image and granted permission for editorial use.

If you believe an image on the site has been used without proper permission or credit, please email hello@brazilianbeautyindex.com and we will sort it out.

9. Use of AI in editorial

We use AI tools to help with editorial work — drafting, summarising, translating, suggesting headlines. We do not publish AI-generated content as if it were written by a human, and we do not let AI invent facts, quotes or product attributes that have not been verified by an editor.

Specifically:

• Every published article is read and signed off by a named human editor.
• Where AI has been used for substantive drafting (more than light copy-editing), this is disclosed in the article footer.
• AI-generated images are not used for product photography, reviews or salon reports. Where AI imagery is used for decorative purposes (e.g. abstract illustration), it is labelled.

10. Errors and corrections

If we get something wrong, we want to know. Our full process is set out in the Correction Policy — including who to email, what to send, and how we make corrections visible to readers.

11. Contact

These standards were last reviewed on 27 May 2026. Version 1.0. They will be refreshed at least annually.