- MIRENA
- Compliance
- Claims and Substantiation Policy
Compliance · Governance standard
Every material claim must have evidence that matches its wording, scope, date, and owner.
The standard classifies claims, assigns evidence thresholds, prohibits unsupported implication, and sets release states for product, commercial, comparative, trust, legal, security, accessibility, and result statements.
Semantec SEO Claims and Substantiation Standard
The standard states what must happen, who owns the decision, what evidence is required, and what blocks release.
Claim inventory
A material claim is recorded as the exact subject, predicate, object or value, qualifier, audience, market, version, date, and page locations.
A slogan, table cell, CTA, visual label, schema property, testimonial, comparison verdict, and omission can all make or imply a claim.
Evidence classes
Identity and product facts should use canonical first-party records. External platform facts should use current official provider documentation. Legal and regulatory statements should use primary law or authoritative regulator guidance with specialist review.
Performance, comparison, testimonial, review, security, accessibility, and certification claims require evidence designed for that claim class.
Scope must travel with the claim
Evidence for one plan, version, market, period, device, account, or customer cannot support a universal statement unless the source says so.
Qualifiers should appear close enough to the claim that a reasonable reader sees the real boundary before acting.
Evidence matrix
| Claim class | Minimum source | Common blocker |
|---|---|---|
| Company identity | Canonical company and founder record | Unverified legal or registration detail |
| Product feature | Current product documentation and implementation record | Feature differs by version or platform |
| Price and offer | Live pricing, checkout, order, and terms | VAT, period, market, or renewal omitted |
| Comparison | Current sources for every material option and criterion | Mixed units, dates, or desired winner |
| Testimonial or review | Permission, identity, exact wording, date, and relationship | Fabrication, withdrawal, or hidden incentive |
| Performance result | Method, baseline, period, source, owner, and limitations | No reproducible record or causal overstatement |
| Security or certification | Current attestation or formal control evidence | Provider claim misrepresented as company certification |
| Accessibility | Target-environment testing and issue record | Checklist treated as certification |
| Legal or compliance | Primary source and accountable specialist review | Generic AI summary or wrong jurisdiction |
Prohibited claim practices
- Inventing or simulating reviews, clients, citations, case studies, awards, certifications, or results
- Using a provider's certification as a Semantec SEO certification
- Removing a material qualifier from a price, feature, comparison, or policy
- Using future intent, roadmap, or draft configuration as a current fact
- Treating correlation, one example, or an illustration as proof of causation
- Publishing an unknown or disputed value as a confident answer
- Using structured data to assert information that the visible page does not support
Release states
Approve only when the claim, source, scope, date, owner, and visible context align. Mark a claim qualified when the limitation is material and visible. Hold it when evidence is missing, stale, or disputed. Reject it when it is false, unlawful, misleading, or outside the page's job.
Reverification
Prices, offers, platform rules, laws, policies, providers, versions, integrations, and search features require event-based or scheduled reverification. A cosmetic page update does not refresh the evidence date.
Material source changes trigger review of every dependent claim and component.
Correction and escalation
A challenged claim is held when continuing publication could mislead or cause material harm. The owner records the issue, source, interim action, final decision, and dependent pages.
Public errors follow the Corrections and Retractions Policy.
Controlling guidance and first-party records.
The standard uses current source material but does not convert platform guidance into a ranking guarantee.
Google helpful content guidance
Official quality, expertise, trust, and evidence questions.
Google structured-data policies
Official visible-content and misleading-markup requirements.
Semantec SEO Disclaimer
First-party claim and reliance boundaries.
Continue to the owner of the next control.
Claims, sources, AI review, approval, corrections, conflicts, and rights requests remain separate decisions.
Owned route
Source and Citation Policy
Source hierarchy, quotations, dates, and provenance.
Open route →
Owned route
No Guarantees Policy
Outcome language and prohibited guarantees.
Open route →
Owned route
Corrections Policy
Claim correction, disclosure, retraction, and recordkeeping.
Open route →
Owned route
Conflicts and Disclosures
Material relationships and reviewer independence.
Open route →
Owned route
Disclaimer
AI, professional, external-system, and result boundaries.
Open route →
Owned route
Company facts
Canonical identity and product facts.
Open route →