Why Open Source Adverse Media Screening Is So Incredibly Inefficient – A Step-by-Step Breakdown

“Compliance teams spend 10-45 minutes per Adverse Media screening and get a very unsatisfying report.” – Tim Backhaus

Step 1: Copy and paste the search string with the name and keywords from a tool into Google (1 minute)

**Problem: ** You’re limited to 32 words (e.g., “Money Laundering” counts as two words), making it impossible to cover all relevant risks. PS: If you’re using Excel to create the search string like most others—really? That’s just asking for a disaster!

Step 2: Skim through the first page of Google and eliminate irrelevant results (2 minutes)

Problem: The first four results are ads—usually irrelevant. Half of the remaining results are obvious false positives (e.g., Amazon, Netflix, Pinterest pages). In reality, you’re not reviewing 20 articles, just 10. When in doubt, analysts are supposed to open links to check for relevance—but with daily production targets and eight hours of repetitive work, do you really think that happens consistently?

Step 3: Open the remaining links and determine, one by one, if they indicate risk (5–40 minutes)

Problem: Smart analysts use “Ctrl + F” to find mentions of the subject and skip through the text. But even then, it takes time to grasp the context. Often, real analysis requires rereading and critical thinking to determine whether the subject is actually associated with risk. And that up to 20 times per screening.

Step 4: Take a screenshot to document that you conducted Adverse Media Screening, then save it in a folder (2 minutes)

Problem: A screenshot (or printout) only captures headlines and snippets. It doesn’t prove which links you opened or checked. And as for saving screenshots in a folder—2010 called; it wants its tech back.

And if you want to see how open source adverse media can be done better, talk to me directly or try Taidalos—get 25 free screenings. 👇

Email Tim Backhaus: [email protected]