Roasterlist is an independent directory. No roaster pays to be listed. No brand pays for a better description. This page sets out how we work and what readers can expect.
Independence is the foundation. Three things follow from it.
No paid listings. A roaster cannot pay to appear on Roasterlist. They cannot pay to rank higher, appear on more pages, or get a better description. The directory is the same whether a roaster is one person in a shed or a national brand.
No sponsored editorial. We don't accept payment for editorial coverage of any kind. If we publish a guide, a feature, or a list, no roaster has paid to be in it. If that ever changes, this page will say so first.
Affiliate links are disclosed and never influence editorial. Some links on Roasterlist are affiliate links and we run display advertising. These are how the site pays for itself. They never determine which roasters we list, how they're described, or how they rank. The full picture is on the affiliate disclosure page.
Roasterlist aims to be a complete record of independent UK coffee roasters. The bar for inclusion is straightforward.
That's it. We're not building a "best of" list. We're building a definitive reference. If a roaster meets the criteria, they should be on Roasterlist whether we love their coffee or have never tried it.
Every roaster description on Roasterlist is researched and written individually. The process for each one looks like this.
We don't copy marketing copy. We don't generate descriptions from a template. We don't lift from another directory. If a description would be the same for ten roasters, we haven't done the work. We treat the description as something you'd say to a friend who asked what the roaster was like.
Most pages on Roasterlist (region pages, directory pages, the browse page) are sorted by structural criteria: alphabetical, by location, or by data attribute. Order is not editorial.
Some pages do involve editorial judgement. Our "Best of" guides and curated lists rank or feature roasters based on a stated set of criteria. When we do this, the criteria are visible on the page. The methodology page explains the framework we use.
One rule applies everywhere. Affiliate relationships, advertising, or commercial connections never affect rankings or featured status. If we feature a roaster who happens to be an affiliate partner, the affiliate relationship is disclosed on the page and the editorial reasoning is visible.
Si Walker, the editor, has no commercial interest in any UK coffee roaster. He doesn't own, work for, consult to, or take payment from any roaster listed on Roasterlist. If that changes for any specific roaster, we will declare the connection on the relevant page and exclude that roaster from any "best of" feature.
When a fact comes from somewhere specific (a roaster's website, an interview, a public dataset, a published article) we'll attribute it. Where we make an editorial judgement, the language makes that clear ("we think", "in our view", "based on our reading"). We don't dress opinion as fact.
We get things wrong. Coffee roasters change ownership, move premises, retire flagship beans, rebrand, and occasionally close. If you spot something inaccurate, the corrections page has the fastest way to flag it. We aim to fix factual errors within seven days of being notified.
This page sets out the principles behind editorial work on Roasterlist. It does not cover affiliate disclosure (separate page), how the directory is built and maintained as a dataset (the methodology page), or the privacy and data terms of using the site.