Adverse media
The second column on the Screening tab: news coverage naming a subject, filed by category.
Starting the check
Enable Adverse media on New Company Search to start the company check with the request. When the
deployment has a DILISENSE_API_KEY, adverseMediaEnabled() makes the chip available and it is enabled
by default; without that configuration the chip is disabled and no check starts. Each check is drawn
against the configured allowance.
Additional checks for directors or beneficial owners are started from Screening and confirmed with the subjects they will search.
The counts are not a total
An article can be filed under several categories, so the per-category counts overlap and adding them up produces a number larger than the articles that exist. The cell therefore shows one exact figure that can be stood behind, the heaviest adverse category, and says how many other categories there are. The result's own page carries the exact per-category figures, and is the only place numbers of articles are shown.
A sitting politician scores in the millions there without a word of it being adverse. It is shown, and it is deliberately not given the treatment the adverse categories get.
The articles
Behind the counts: the headlines themselves, newest first, with publication dates and links. The links are the checkable part, as always.
Ruling an article out
A hit is a name appearing in a story. The subject may be the accused, or equally the victim, the witness, the lawyer in the last paragraph, or a different person of the same name entirely, and the provider counts those alike. Reading the article and deciding is the reviewer's work, and the result's page is where it is written down.
Every article has a Not this subject button. It asks for an optional reason, marks the article as ruled out with your name and the date, and records the ruling in the case's activity. The article stays on the page, greyed, so the next reviewer sees what was judged and can disagree; Reinstate puts it back.
A ruling belongs to the subject and the article, not to the check. Check the subject again and the articles already ruled out come back already ruled out.
Where the reviewing agent is switched on for screening hits, its proposal sits under each article it has read, and a ruling it made on its own in auto-pilot says so. It reads the article text beside the subject's identifiers and never confirms that an article is about the subject — the ones it cannot rule out are left for you, with its reading attached.
The provider counts articles across its whole index and returns at most ten per category. Ruling out the ten on the page says nothing about the rest, so the per-category figures, the heaviest-category badge and the "needs review" flag all stand. What the page and the case's Screening tab add is how many of the listed articles were ruled out.
The lookback window
How far back a check looks is a policy decision set on your deployment. Three years is a common horizon for onboarding, and the whole index is the right answer when the question is has this person ever been convicted of anything.
Because the window changes what the answer means, whatever was in force is written onto each run rather than only living in a setting. A result therefore states its own coverage, and an old check does not silently acquire a new window's meaning.
In the report
Adverse media gets its own part: the outcomes per subject and, if your configuration switches the optional section on, the individual headlines behind the counts. Articles that were ruled out are listed with the ruling under them, and the outcomes table says how many of the returned articles were ruled out. See Report options.
Adverse media has not been configured on your deployment. There is no sandbox for this one, so the column simply says it is off. Ask support.