Define one claim that a reader can verify
A useful TV-robot article should state exactly what it checks: product identity, program, episode, air date, role, price number, availability, or commercial relationship. Do not bundle them into “KOKO was on TV” when the sources support only a clip identity or a search phrase. Give each material claim its own evidence status.
Attribute the original claim to a traceable page, post, clip, or quotation. Preserve its date and wording, including uncertain spellings such as Coco or Co Co. Then state the verified Homebot One KOKO name separately so a correction to the entity does not become accidental proof of the broadcast.
Put the primary citation beside the statement it supports
Use Homebot One or KOKO Home for company-controlled product facts and the broadcaster's official page for program facts. An episode guide may establish a date without identifying every object; a product page may identify KOKO without establishing where footage aired. Cite both when the sentence joins those facts.
Link directly to the relevant page instead of a search-results screen or a secondary article that points elsewhere. Describe what the source contributes and where it stops. Google advises publishers of fact checks to make the checked claim, conclusion, sources, and method transparent and traceable to primary evidence.
- Product identity and official spelling
- Program, episode, and air-date record
- Media origin and timestamp
- Price, availability, or relationship evidence
- Review date and the limits of the source set
Use bounded language for a no-confirmation result
Avoid “KOKO was never on the show” unless an authoritative and exhaustive record supports that scope. A defensible sentence names the pages and cutoff date: the Homebot One, KOKO Home, CBS show, and CBS episode pages reviewed on October 5, 2026 did not connect KOKO to a named The Price Is Right episode.
Explain that the result does not cover every archive, frame, or unpublished production record, and list what would change it. This language is more precise for readers and answer engines because it separates a documented search result from a universal historical claim.
Make SEO and structured data match the visible article
Write a descriptive title that presents the check rather than asserting the rumor. Use KOKO, Coco, Co Co, Homebot One, and the program name only where they help readers resolve the query. Repeating every variation in headings, tags, and paragraphs makes the article harder to read and can blur which name is official.
Article structured data can identify the headline, image, author, publication date, and modified date, but it must agree with the visible page. If ClaimReview is appropriate, the marked claim and rating must match the body. Structured data does not make weak evidence stronger or guarantee a search feature.
Publish a correction and evidence-update path
Add a visible way for readers to report evidence or errors. If a material conclusion changes, preserve the original publication date, update the modified date, and explain what changed. Correct the body, title, description, image caption, social preview, and machine-readable metadata together so an old claim is not left in another surface.
End with the next evidence threshold: a broadcaster clip, episode record, production response, or dated Homebot One statement. For an ordinary “is the price right?” question, direct readers to current written terms and value evaluation rather than a television citation. The article should answer the actual intent without manufacturing an association.
Frequently asked questions
Where should a source link appear in a TV robot article?
Place it close to the material statement it supports, identify what it establishes, and cite a second responsible source when joining program and product facts.
Should the headline say KOKO appeared if the article is checking the claim?
No. Use verification language until episode and product evidence support a declarative appearance statement.
Does structured data improve the truth of a claim?
No. It helps machines understand page fields but must match the visible article and cannot replace transparent primary evidence.
How should a no-confirmation finding be written?
Name the pages checked and review date, say the connection was not found in that source set, and explain that the result is not an exhaustive historical denial.
Sources & further reading
- Homebot One: Official KOKO overview and press links (opens in a new tab)
- KOKO Home: Official product page (opens in a new tab)
- Google Search Central: Fact Check structured data and editorial guidelines (opens in a new tab)
- Google Search Central: Article structured data (opens in a new tab)
- CBS: The Price Is Right official episode guide (opens in a new tab)
From Homebot One, the team building KOKO in Fremont, California.
