Editorial Standards & Independence

The independence problem in casino affiliate publishing

The Canadian online casino affiliate market is structurally biased toward giving every operator a positive review. Publishers earn revenue when readers click through and deposit, which creates pressure to soften criticism, hide red flags, and rank higher-paying operators above more deserving ones. We built CanadaCasinos.io knowing that incentive existed, and the policies on this page are how we resist it.

None of these claims are unfalsifiable. If you find evidence we have violated any standard below, email editorial@canadacasinos.io and we will investigate, correct, and publicly log the issue. Our corrections page is the receipt for whether we actually live up to this policy or not.

Separation of editorial and commercial

Casino review scoring is performed by editorial staff before any affiliate contract is signed. Our affiliate manager does not participate in scoring discussions, does not see draft reviews before publication, and cannot request score adjustments. When a casino requests changes to a review, the request is forwarded to editorial; we respond only to factual disputes (we will correct verifiable errors), never to commercial pressure (we do not raise scores in exchange for higher commission rates or exclusivity agreements).

Operators can buy display advertising on our site (banners, sidebar placements). They cannot buy review placements, ranking position, or ranking adjustments. Display advertising appears clearly labelled as such; ranked review lists never include paid placements interleaved with editorial picks.

How we fact-check before publishing

• Licensing verification, every operator's iGaming Ontario or alternative regulator status is confirmed against the official registry on the day of publication. Out-of-date or expired registrations cause an immediate review pull.
• Game count verification, claimed game counts are checked by logging into the operator's lobby with a real Canadian IP. Marketing-page numbers are not used.
• RTP and provider claims, RTP averages and provider lists are cross-referenced against operator-published documentation and provider press releases. Vague claims ("hundreds of games") are replaced with our own counts.
• Withdrawal speed claims, withdrawal times are tested with real money on at least one method (typically INTERAC). Marketing claims that exceed tested results are flagged in the review body.
• Bonus terms, full T&Cs are read in detail. Wagering requirements, eligible games, max cashout, and expiry are extracted into the review verbatim. We do not paraphrase numbers.
• Player feedback synthesis, we sample at least 10 Reddit threads, Trustpilot reviews, and complaint forum posts per operator. Recurring themes are reflected in pros/cons; isolated complaints are noted but not weighted heavily.

What we will not do

• Accept payment for reviews, ranking position, or ranking adjustments
• Publish reviews of operators we have not registered an account with and tested directly
• Recommend offshore operators to Ontario residents (iGO licensing is a non-negotiable requirement for Ontario rankings)
• Use stock photography or AI-generated screenshots in place of real lobby captures
• Publish "as told to" content where operators write their own copy under our byline
• Mark inactive or de-registered operators as "live" to retain affiliate links
• Recommend operators with active AGCO enforcement actions for advertising or compliance violations until those actions are resolved

Conflicts of interest we disclose

When a member of our editorial team has used a casino's product extensively as a regular player (not a review test), that history is disclosed on the relevant review. When a former colleague has moved to an operator we cover, the relationship is disclosed for at least 24 months after their departure. When we accept any non-cash benefit from an operator (event invitations, comped accommodation), it is disclosed in any subsequent coverage of that operator for 12 months.

We do not currently hold equity in any operator we review. If that ever changes, the holding will be declared at the top of every relevant review.

How we handle corrections

Errors fall into three categories with different correction protocols:

• Factual errors (wrong game count, incorrect license number, outdated payout time): corrected within 24 hours of confirmation. The review carries an inline correction note dated to the day the error was fixed. Major corrections (those that change the rating) are also added to the corrections log.
• Outdated information (game counts, bonus offers, RTP averages that drift over time): refreshed on a rolling basis through our enrichment pipeline. Reviews carry a "Last verified" date in the metadata block.
• Score corrections (when re-testing produces a materially different rating): the new score is published with a brief explanation of what changed since the previous test. Score history is preserved in the corrections log.

Sourcing standards

Every claim of fact in a review is sourced. Sources fall into a hierarchy:

1. Primary sources, AGCO public registries, iGaming Ontario operator registry, AGCO enforcement actions registry, official operator T&Cs, our own real-money testing logs.
2. Secondary sources, peer-reviewed gambling research (Centre for Gambling Studies, Responsible Gambling Council reports), regulator-published statistics (iGO quarterly reports), provider-published RTP documentation.
3. Tertiary sources, operator press releases (treated with appropriate scepticism), Reddit/Trustpilot feedback (synthesised, never quoted as authoritative).

Marketing copy from operator websites is never used as a source for performance claims.

AI use in our editorial process

We use large language models for editing assistance, draft research summaries, and structural review. We do not publish raw AI-generated reviews. Every published review is fact-checked, edited, and approved by a named editorial staff member. AI use does not change our independence policy or sourcing standards. For details on which AI tools we use and where in the process, see the methodology page.

Affiliate disclosure (plain-language summary)

When you click through to an operator from our site and register, we may earn a commission. That commission is paid by the operator, not by you. Click commissions never affect ranking position or score. Our most-recommended operators are not always our highest-paying — we frequently rank lower-commission operators above higher-commission ones when the editorial case supports it.

The full legal version is on our affiliate disclosure page.

Editorial team

Our reviewers are listed on the contributors page with full bios, areas of focus, and contact information. Every review carries the author's byline and the date of publication or last update. Reviews are not anonymous and are not "house" attributed; a real person is responsible for every score we publish.

Contact and feedback

Editorial concerns: editorial@canadacasinos.io. Operators disputing factual claims should email this address with specific evidence; we respond to all factual challenges within five business days. Press, partnership, and commercial inquiries go to partnerships@canadacasinos.io — that channel is firewalled from editorial decisions.

This page was last updated April 19, 2026. Material changes to our editorial standards are version-controlled in our public theme repository.