Reviews
Part of How to set evidence labels before choosing a creator media kit tool
The evidence to record before a creator media kit tool choice is defensible
Creator media kits selection checklist for England: record the evidence needed for content control, delivery, permissions and a defensible choice of portfolio tool.
Record six things before you compare a media kit tool: decision date, candidate and exact plan, source of each finding, evidence state, permission for every asset, and terms for the actual account.
What to take away
- Keep one selection record per candidate, holding the decision date, the exact plan or configuration and the source for each finding.
- Label every finding documented, observed, unresolved or not applicable, and define those labels before you use them.
- Treat permission for images, logos and quotes as evidenced or unresolved, never as granted by an upload button.
- Inspect the exact receiving output, whether hosted page or document, with the real captions and work samples.
- Record terms for the account you would actually buy, including recurring charges and cancellation conditions.
Why the record comes before the tool comparison
A feature list describes a product, not your task. Fix the task first: what the kit must deliver, who maintains it, and what the recipient must be able to read.
The cluster's shortlist names Canva and Beacons without awarding either, and that comparison of what the official evidence supports explains why a shortlist is not a verdict.
Where a product shows no version identifier, record the page and the access date instead of a guessed version number.
Selection record essentials
- Required receiving format
- Person maintaining the kit
- Outputhosted, document or both
- Work samples and captions
- Evidence dates
- Decision date and candidate name
- Exact plan or configuration
Example: one filled selection record
The table below is an illustrative record, not a completed trial.
One filled selection record
- Decision date
- 6 September 2026
- Candidate
- Candidate A, media kit template tool
- Configuration
- Free tier, PDF export
- Source
- Provider pricing page, accessed 6 September 2026
- Evidence state
- Observed on the page, not tested with our own file
- Unresolved
- Whether the exported PDF keeps caption links
If a cell says a tool supports something, ask who tested it and with which file.
Checking audience evidence before it appears
- Who supplied each audience figure, and which period does it cover?
- Can the output keep the explanation beside the figure or the work sample?
- Is each unresolved claim marked for review rather than given a plausible replacement?
CAP Code section 3 on misleading advertising and substantiation covers objective claims in marketing communications within scope. Use it to frame a review of the wording you publish, with qualified advice where needed.
It does not rank tools, and a provider's claim about its own template is not independent evidence. A sales page screenshot will not settle whether your own file meets a standard you have set, so read the media kit quality checklist for what to inspect before a file leaves your workspace.
Permission and continuing access
- Is there evidence the creator may use each image, logo and quotation in this kit?
- Who holds the editable source file and the access needed for later corrections?
- What remains unresolved about asset terms or an agency's proposed handover?
A kit reproducing a venue's logo after one event, or a brand's product shot supplied by that brand, still needs the permission route recorded: who granted it, when, and for which output.
GOV.UK's copyright guidance sets out permission routes, but it cannot decide the licence position of a single asset.
Some handover clauses release the editable source on final payment and grant no further licence. Record that wording and the version date of the document you read.
Permission and control checks
- Evidence of right to use images
- Evidence for logos and quoted material
- Who retains editable source
- Access for later corrections
- Unresolved asset terms
- Supplier handover in writing
Terms, charges and cancellation
Get current terms for the account you would actually buy. Recurring charges, seat limits and cancellation conditions belong in the record with the page and date you read them.
No price or subscription comparison appears here. Tax and VAT questions sit outside this record and belong with HMRC and an accountant.
Making the choice reviewable
Keep the brief, the sources and any later observations in one folder. Name the person who decides and the evidence still missing. Handover questions return after launch, so the media kit handover guide on ownership and version control is worth reading next.
Accessibility needs specificity: heading order, alt text and reading order in the exported file. GOV.UK's accessible documents guidance works as a house safeguard, not as proof of compliance.
A decision is defensible when a reader who was not in the room can rebuild it from the record.
Common questions
What should each row of the selection record contain?
Give the row a decision date, the candidate name, the exact configuration, the source page and the evidence state. Where no version identifier exists, record the access date rather than a guessed version.
Does the advertising code rank media kit tools?
No. CAP Code section 3 governs misleading claims in marketing communications within scope. It does not compare products, and a provider's own template claim is not independent evidence.
What should I ask an agency to confirm in writing?
Ask for the deliverable, the maintenance responsibilities and what happens to the editable source. Confirm whether buying the design includes any continuing reuse.
