Reviews
Part of Retail media reviews: a method for keeping evidence apart
Selecting retail media suppliers by recording what was examined, not by scoring what was not
Retail media selection checklist for England records scope, source evidence, conflicts and qualified review requirements without inventing scores or test results.
What to take away
- A retail media selection checklist records one row per criterion: the item examined, the source, the reviewer, the method, the date and the limitation.
- Every shortlisted supplier receives the same written assignment, so like is compared with like.
- Promotional wording goes to CAP, consent and data flows to ICO guidance, and supplier dependency to the NCSC cloud supply-chain principle.
- Evidence that was not gathered stays UNKNOWN. It never becomes a zero score or an assumed average.
- The decision record lists unresolved requirements with an evidence owner and the consequence for the assignment.
No product, agency or independent reviewer is named in this checklist, and no test results are claimed.
Subject, reviewers and conflicts before any comparison
Record the exact product or service, its version and the date of the supporting record. Name the retailer property, the placement format and the scope. A supplier's wider portfolio must not stand in for the single component under consideration.
Name the commissioning organisation and each person assessing a criterion. Keep editorial checking separate from qualified advertising, privacy, security and measurement work. Leave a credential field empty rather than inventing a reviewer.
For a publisher conflict, write UNVERIFIED in the conflict field. Name the suspected relationship, the person who must confirm it, and the date the confirmation is due.
Subject and reviewer record
- Record exact product, version and date
- Specify retailer property, placement format, scope
- Name commissioning publication or buying organisation
- Name each person performing assessments
- Separate editorial checking from qualified reviews
- Confirm affiliate, sponsorship and material relationships
One assignment description for every candidate
Both shortlisted suppliers receive one description of the controlled inventory, the catalogue inputs and the intended reporting. State whether the work covers ad decisioning, shopper-facing rendering, campaign administration or agency operation. Keep marketplace functions outside scope unless they are expressly required.
One assignment description
- Subject
- Product, version, retailer property, placement format
- Scope
- Ad decisioning, rendering, administration or agency operation
- Reporting
- Metrics named, period, currency and VAT basis
- Evidence status
- Documented, observed or not examined
Where deliverables stay unagreed, the retail media service standards note explains why figures should remain unsigned until someone can authorise them.
Identical assignment for candidates
Candidate A
- Inventory
- Same description
- Catalogue inputs
- Same inputs
- Intended reporting
- Same reporting
- Scope
- Ad decisions etc.
- Evidence status
- Documented
- Commercial values
- Unknown
Candidate B
- Inventory
- Same description
- Catalogue inputs
- Same inputs
- Intended reporting
- Same reporting
- Scope
- Ad decisions etc.
- Evidence status
- Documented
- Commercial values
- Unknown
Example: one criterion row recorded in full
The table below is illustrative only. No real supplier, reviewer or date is described.
One criterion row recorded in full
| Criterion | Source | Reviewer | Method | Date | Limitation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sponsored placement rendering | Supplier demo, 9 screenshots | Buyer's digital lead | Supplier-led walkthrough | 4 March 2026 | No live campaign; accessibility untested |
| Off-site audience reach | Supplier rate card | Media manager | Desk review of supplied document | 4 March 2026 | Reach model not supplied |
Each column must stand on its own. A blank reviewer or date signals that the criterion was not assessed.
Each criterion row: source, method, date and limitation
- Write the criterion as a question the evidence can answer.
- State the source and whether it is first-party, current and inside the agreed scope.
- Name the reviewer and the competence they bring to that criterion.
- Record the method and the date.
- Add the limitation in the same row as the finding.
Keep clicks, credited sales, modelled estimates and causal outcomes in separate columns. A reporting capability does not validate every reading taken from its output. Compare click-based and view-based attribution before treating a sales figure as a causal result.
Do not infer a rendered placement from an ad response or attention from visibility. Leave accessibility, usability, reliability and support quality untested unless an assessment was genuinely carried out.
Claims, consent and supply chain routed once
CAP code section 3 sets the substantiation rules for objective marketing claims. A competent reviewer should examine any promotional wording used to justify selection. The code is not a product certification.
The ICO's online advertising guidance covers consent for storage and access technologies. Review the actual purposes and data flows instead of trusting the phrase first-party data.
The NCSC cloud supply-chain principle addresses dependencies and access to information. Ask for evidence inside the proposed service boundary. A shortlist place proves nothing about security.
The decision record and its evidence owners
List unresolved requirements with an evidence owner and the consequence for the assignment. Preserve contradictory records and check whether their versions or scopes differ before resolving anything. Avoid a single blended score that hides missing information.
The rendered placement disclosure check is where you confirm what a shopper actually sees, rather than what a specification claims.
An authorised assessment by a qualified reviewer is the next step for the named candidate. This checklist recommends no product or agency and grants no launch approval.
Common questions
What does the checklist record when evidence is missing?
Enter UNKNOWN, name the requirement, and give it an evidence owner and a date. Absence from an introductory page is not proof that a product cannot do something.
How do I compare terms if the checklist holds no numbers?
Use the same deliverables, period, units, currency and VAT basis for each candidate. Never place an assumed price in an unpopulated row.
Which body handles which question?
Promotional wording goes to CAP, consent and data flows to the ICO, and supplier dependency to the NCSC cloud principle.
Can this checklist approve or rank a supplier?
No. It structures questions and an evidence trail. Approval belongs to an authorised assessment of the specific candidate and arrangement.
