Home-market evidence · US buyer questions
SearchD helps international beauty brands understand when home-market reviews, current product evidence or US media coverage are absent from AI answers. We map what you already have against what the answers cite, prepare verifiable English material, and coordinate the next corrections with your team.
The material exists; its role in the answer is unclear. An article can be public without being cited. A review can be genuine without supporting a particular product claim. SearchD keeps those distinctions in the working record.
We identify the original product and review corpus, its date range and the question it can reasonably inform. The English summary retains the source and the home-market context.
What comes back: an attributable evidence summary, its source links and the buyer questions used to check whether it is reflected.
We compare the criticism with the current claim and the evidence your team can substantiate. Newness is not treated as correctness; an unresolved concern stays visible.
What comes back: a claim-by-claim comparison, approved updates and a record of what still needs support or a source-owner response.
We map the existing coverage to the actual buyer questions and cited pages. Product fit, accessible text, names and attribution are checked before another article is commissioned.
What comes back: the coverage-to-citation gap, owned-page updates and focused requests for your PR team or the publisher.
Illustrative source-to-answer map from inside the deliverable. These are example records, not findings about a client or evidence of a changed AI answer.
| Source | What it can support | What we compare | Next action |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Hwahae review collectionVerify the original product and period | Attributed customer experiences for the identified product, in the market and period covered by the source. | The original review record, an accurate English summary and the sources cited in relevant US buyer answers. | Prepare an approved, source-linked summary. Do not turn popularity or a review count into clinical proof or US sales evidence. |
| An existing US beauty articleMatch the article to the question | The specific product facts, attributed views or editorial judgment actually present in that article. | The article’s readable text, names, links and date against the buyer question and the answer’s cited sources. | Clarify the connection on an owned page or prepare a correction request with the PR team. Preserve the publisher’s editorial ownership. |
| An older critical post and newer evidenceKeep supported criticism and open questions | The old post documents the claim it examined. New material supports only the changes or facts it can verify. | The same claim, product version, evidence date and source context—not simply which page was published later. | Publish approved factual updates, request corrections where justified and retain unresolved issues in the follow-up record. |
SearchD provides the question and source analysis. Your brand approves its facts; your PR partners and publishers control their own work and pages.
Collect original reviews, approved product evidence and US coverage with dates, product identifiers and attribution. Record missing access or usage rights before reuse.
Run the agreed buyer questions and retain the responses and cited URLs. Distinguish no citation, mistaken attribution and a source that does not answer the question.
Receive English briefs or drafts, page-edit notes and a contact list. Writing and outreach follow the agreed scope.
Receive a dated log of requests and any published URLs, plus the follow-up answers and changes in their sources.
Each handoff names the question, source, fact to check, requested change and page owner. Your team keeps the records and agreed content. See the deliverables and responsibilities.
If an answer repeats an old ingredient list, a wrong retailer or a shipping error, start with US product information correction. If the source is correct but the brand is still absent, the evidence map helps identify the next work.
The K-beauty service overview connects these services. Read our measurement method and the evidence behind our claims before treating a citation change as a client result.
SearchD checks the original review source, product match, collection period and what the reviews actually support. We prepare attributable English summaries with links to the original material, then compare relevant US buyer answers and their citations. Home-market customer experiences are not relabeled as US customer reviews, clinical findings or proof that a product works for everyone. A review count alone does not establish which questions the evidence can answer.
We preserve the original criticism and identify the exact claim it discusses. Your team supplies newer, verifiable evidence and any approved change to the product or claim. SearchD distinguishes what has changed, what the newer material supports and what remains unresolved, then prepares factual updates or correction requests and checks later answers. We do not manufacture endorsements, erase valid criticism or promise that a newer source will replace an older one.
We compare the coverage inventory with the sources cited in the agreed buyer questions. For each article, we check the product and brand connection, relevant claims, publication date, accessible text and attribution. You receive a source-to-answer map, proposed updates to pages you control and owner-specific requests to discuss with your PR team. Publication, AI citation and recommendation are recorded separately; a press placement does not prove the other two.
Not as an automatic part of this work. SearchD diagnoses the evidence and citation gaps, prepares source-backed material and coordinates agreed corrections or outreach. Your existing PR team and publishers retain their roles. New pitching, paid placement, expert recruitment and content rights need an explicit scope; publisher acceptance and AI selection remain outside our control.
The working record connects buyer questions, existing reviews or articles, cited sources, the facts each source supports and the next action and owner. Follow-up observations retain the original answers and citations. A new link, a corrected article and an answer that names the brand are different outcomes. We report each separately and do not treat an uncontrolled before-and-after change as proof that one edit caused it.
See who US buyers find instead of you.
Send us your URL. We run 20 buyer questions across five engines by hand and send you the transcript back within 48 hours.
What the free report looks like. Yours is built from your own category and market.