Protected Commentary, Public Accountability, and Consumer Discernment
The Tarot Reader Integrity Reports Directory publishes evaluative criticism, consumer-protection commentary, and public-interest analysis of publicly available tarot content.
The reports are based on public-facing professional material, including transcripts, titles, metadata, quoted excerpts, video-duration data, and other content available to viewers at the time of analysis.
The Directory does not evaluate a reader’s private life, personal character, internal intent, or spiritual beliefs. It evaluates public content using a disclosed methodology and a consistent scoring framework.
Protected Public Expression
The Directory reserves all rights and protections available under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, the Ohio Constitution, Ohio Revised Code Chapter 2747, and any other applicable protections for public expression, opinion, fair comment, criticism, consumer commentary, and matters of public concern.
Ohio Revised Code Chapter 2747, the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act, provides a procedure for expedited relief in certain civil actions based on protected expression. Where applicable, the Directory will seek all relief available under that law, including dismissal, stay of proceedings, attorney’s fees, court costs, litigation expenses, and any other remedy available by law.
Evidence-Based Evaluative Opinion
The Tarot Reader Integrity Reports are evaluative opinions based on disclosed criteria, documented evidence, and a consistent analytical framework.
Scores, grades, classifications, archetypes, red flags, green flags, and predicted viewer-impact assessments represent the Directory’s professional opinion regarding the alignment of public content with the Lighthouse Standard.
They are not statements of absolute fact, medical diagnoses, psychological diagnoses, legal conclusions, or claims about a reader’s private character or intent.
Public Source Material
The Directory analyzes publicly available content.
Reports may rely on transcripts, titles, video metadata, publication data, quoted excerpts, and other public-facing material available at the time of analysis. The purpose of preserving this material is to maintain an accurate record of the sample reviewed and to ensure that reports remain tied to the content actually analyzed.
If a reader believes a report contains a factual error, they may use the Correction Request process.
If a reader believes their current content has meaningfully changed, they may request a formal re-review through the Re-Review process.
View the full Lighthouse Standard Dispute Resolution & Re-Review Protocol here.
Use of Third-Party Channel Names, Logos, Profile Images, and Screenshots
The Tarot Reader Integrity Reports Directory may reference publicly available YouTube channel names, profile images, logos, thumbnails, screenshots, video titles, transcripts, and related channel materials for purposes of identification, commentary, criticism, consumer education, research, and review.
These materials remain the property of their respective owners. Their appearance on this website does not imply sponsorship, endorsement, partnership, affiliation, approval, or authorization by YouTube, Google, the channel owner, reader, creator, or any other third party.
Where third-party images or branding are displayed, they are used in a limited, contextual manner to help readers identify the channel being reviewed or discussed. We do not claim ownership over third-party names, logos, images, screenshots, or branding.If you are a rights holder and believe material on this site has been used improperly, please contact us with the specific page URL, the material at issue, and your relationship to the material so we can review the concern.
No Intimidation or Prior Restraint
The Directory does not remove, suppress, or alter evaluative opinions in response to intimidation, reputational pressure, private demands, or legal threats.
Good-faith factual corrections are welcome through the Correction Request process. Good-faith re-review requests are available through the formal Re-Review process.
Legal demands that seek to silence protected public-interest commentary, suppress disclosed evaluative opinion, or punish the Directory for publishing consumer-protection criticism will be reviewed under all available public-expression and anti-SLAPP protections.
Attorney’s Fees and Litigation Expenses
Where Ohio Revised Code Chapter 2747 or any other applicable anti-SLAPP or public-expression protection applies, the Directory reserves the right to seek recovery of attorney’s fees, court costs, litigation expenses, and any other relief available by law.
Where Ohio Revised Code Chapter 2747 or any other applicable anti-SLAPP or public-expression protection applies, the Directory reserves the right to seek recovery of attorney’s fees, court costs, litigation expenses, and any other relief available by law, including relief described in Ohio Revised Code Section 2747.05.
Nothing on this page should be interpreted as a waiver of any constitutional, statutory, procedural, evidentiary, or common-law defense.
Nothing on this page should be interpreted as a waiver of any constitutional, statutory, procedural, evidentiary, or common-law defense.
Communications From Counsel
Legal representatives are encouraged to review the Directory’s Methodology Page, Correction Request process, Re-Review process, and this Legal Notice before sending demands regarding a published report.
Factual disputes should identify the specific report, the specific challenged statement, the factual basis for the challenge, and the supporting evidence.
General disagreement with a score, grade, classification, methodology, opinion, or interpretation is not the same as a factual error.
Reservation of Rights
The Directory reserves all rights, claims, defenses, privileges, immunities, and remedies available under federal law, Ohio law, and any other applicable jurisdiction.
This page is provided for transparency and public notice. It is not legal advice.
