Methodology
How this report stays independent.
Vendor scores are finalized independently before any commercial conversation begins. Buying a vendor program does not influence current or future scoring. Every vendor runs through the same rubric, self-reported claims are verified against live documentation, and any product I have a commercial interest in is held to the same yardstick and disclosed. That independence is the only reason a score in this report means anything.
The same rubric for everyone
Every vendor in this report is scored on one framework: the same criteria, the same 0 to 5 anchor definitions, the same weights. A vendor does not get an easier scale for being large, a paying customer, a friend of mine, or new to the market. The rubric is published in the report so you can see exactly what each number measures.
Scores are locked before any money is discussed
Scoring finishes first. Only after a vendor’s scores are final do I have any conversation about commercial programs, and that conversation cannot reopen the score. A vendor whose result is strong can license it for their own marketing. A vendor whose result is weak cannot pay to change it. The order is the safeguard: assess, lock, then talk business.
One important aspect of it: vendors did not have to pay to be included. I reached out to vendors I felt met the initial criteria of being relevant in a Video API report.
Claims get verified
A questionnaire answer is a claim, not a fact. Vendor answers are checked against the platform’s live documentation, its public product surface, and its actual behavior before they earn a score. Where a claim describes a sibling product rather than the one under evaluation, or does not hold up against the live docs, the score reflects what I could verify, not what was asserted.
Non-participants are handled openly
Participation is voluntary. When a vendor does not respond, I do one of two things and I say which. If the platform matters too much to leave out, I score it from public sources and independent research, and I flag the profile so you know it was compiled without vendor input. If it is not essential, it moves to the “what has changed” chapter rather than getting a profile it did not earn.
My own products get the same treatment
Independence is not selective. If a tool I have a commercial stake in falls within the scope of what this report scores, it runs through the identical rubric and its commercial relationship to me is stated in the open. The yardstick does not bend for the person holding it.
That said, none of my products are competing in the Video API space.