About FlightLogic

1. How a review is produced, step by step

A review is first-hand only when the page cites evidence of the trip and how it was booked (cash, points, or press comp). Everything else is an editorial assessment from published sources. Scores follow the published rubric on our methodology page, factual claims are checked against primary sources, and every page carries a last-reviewed date.

2. Desk research is labelled as desk research

FlightLogic reviews are currently desk assessments, and say so on the page. Airline and airport directory entries are reference listings built from verified public data (IATA/ICAO codes, alliances, fleet facts, OurAirports records) and are labelled as such — they carry no FlightLogic score and no implication that we have flown that carrier or transited that terminal. Consumer guides cite the primary source their rules come from (CAA regulations, the UK261 text, issuer terms) so a reader can check the original.

3. Scores come from the rubric, not from relationships

Airline scores are weighted composites — customer service 20%, seat comfort 20%, food & beverage 15%, in-flight entertainment 10%, on-time performance 20%, value for money 15% — with the safety score calculated separately and never traded off against comfort. No airline, hotel, lounge, or card issuer sees a score before publication, and none can pay to change one. Commission rates are not visible to whoever scores a product.

4. What suppliers can and cannot do

Suppliers can: point us to primary sources when they believe a fact is wrong, send fleet or schedule updates for the record, and request a correction through the same channel as any reader. Suppliers cannot: pay for coverage or placement, sponsor a score, review or approve copy before publication, have a review removed, or receive preferential anchor text. Press comps, when accepted, are disclosed on the page and buy nothing beyond the trip itself.

5. What triggers a correction — and who decides

A correction is any change to a score, ranking, price, fee, date, rule interpretation, or factual claim a reader could have acted on. Anyone can report one: email hello@flightlogic.co.uk with the page URL and the primary source that contradicts the claim. The editor responsible for the page re-checks the claim against that source; if the error is confirmed, the page is fixed, its last-reviewed date is updated, and the change is logged — dated and attributed — on our public corrections log. The decision sits with the editor, not with the supplier and not with commercial staff.

6. When pages are re-reviewed

Scores and rankings are refreshed on a rolling cycle — rankings quarterly, safety inputs monthly — and individual pages are revisited sooner when a product changes materially: a new seat, a lounge closure, a fee change, a rules change such as a UK261 interpretation. A re-review updates the visible last-reviewed date; we do not touch that date without touching the content it dates.

7. What we refuse to publish

No invented numbers presented as fact — no prices, queue times or statistics we cannot source, and editorial estimates such as Wi-Fi speeds are labelled as estimates, never as measurements. No aggregate consumer ratings, because we do not collect consumer reviews at scale (and the DMCC Act 2024 treats unverifiable ones as a compliance risk, per our review integrity policy). No press-release rewrites presented as journalism. No paid rankings. No "best of" list ordered by commission. Where we do not know, the page says so — an honest gap is publishable; a fabricated number is a defect.