Editorial Standards
These are the working rules of The Seoul Glow Magazine. They exist because of who publishes it: a registered patient facilitator writing about clinics, some of which pay its agency fees. Under Korean law a facilitator is not an eligible medical advertiser at all, so everything here must be journalism, and journalism published under a conflict of interest needs its rules written down where readers can hold it to them. This page is that.
Independence
Editors choose coverage; clinics do not. No clinic commissions an article, sees one before publication, or supplies an author. Nothing on this site is written by a clinic, a manufacturer, or a public relations firm, and nothing ever will be under a staff byline. How the money works, in full, is on How We Make Money.
Sourcing
A factual claim here comes from one of three places: something a reader can check in a public register, something a clinic publishes under its own name, or material a clinic supplied to us in writing. The source is named on the page. Where a fact is stated with a date, the date is the source’s own. What we could not verify is either omitted or said to be unverified; a gap is admitted rather than filled, because a plausible invented figure on a medical page is worse than an honest blank.
Photographs
Every image on this site is a photograph of a real room, a real person or a real object, captioned with who supplied it. We do not publish architectural renderings as rooms, manufacturer marketing images as evidence, or staged results as records. We do not publish before-and-after photographs at all: Korean law prohibits them in medical advertising, and as a facilitator we are not an eligible advertiser. Where a clinic has supplied them, the page says so and says why they are absent.
Consent
No Korean medical institution is named in a record here without its written consent, and this is enforced in code rather than memory: a record without consent on file does not render, does not appear in search, and leaves the sitemap. Doctors’ public roles and published credentials are biography and are used; their patients are not ours to name and never appear.
Dates, and what “checked” means
Articles carry two dates: when a piece was published, and when someone last re-read it and confirmed it is still true. Fixing a typo does not update the second date; only re-verification does. A reference page with no publication date is deliberate: a procedure does not go stale the way news does, and the checked date is the one that matters.
Where a page says “Medically reviewed by”, a named clinician has read that page and agreed in writing to be named as its reviewer. The name is printed with their credential so it can be checked against the medical register, it appears nowhere without that written agreement, and a review is a statement about the page’s accuracy, never an endorsement of any clinic on it.
Corrections
If something here is wrong, we correct it and say that we did, at the foot of the article. Nothing is quietly edited. Tell us via the contact page.
What we never publish
- Before-and-after photographs, in any form.
- Prices, discounts or promotions for a named clinic.
- Rankings, superlatives, or any promise about a result.
- A named clinic without written consent.
- Advertising that is not labelled as advertising. There is currently none at all.