The list of words to avoid is half the surface. The replacement pattern is the other half.
- ✓Six prohibited-phrase categories cover the lexical violations under Title VIII, the 1974 amendment, and the 1988 amendment.
- ✓NAR SOP 10-2 codifies the safe-harbor pattern: third-party-attributed factual data from recognized, reliable, independent, impartial sources.
- ✓Inline attribution at the point of claim is the disclosure format that satisfies the standard.
The prohibited-phrase categories paired with the safe-harbor pattern that replaces each one on a real estate marketing surface.
Words-to-avoid lists circulate widely on real estate marketing sites. They cover the lexical layer. What they usually miss is the replacement pattern. NAR SOP 10-2 codifies the safe harbor: demographic information can be provided when it is derived from a recognized, reliable, independent, and impartial source with explicit attribution. Census Bureau figures, Walk Score walkability data, state Department of Education school-district boundary data, public transit authority accessibility metrics. The replacement pattern is what permits data-rich neighborhood content without the violation.
Race, color, religion, national origin: 1968 protections.
Race or color coding (good area, transitional neighborhood, exclusive) violates the 1968 race and color protections. Religious-proximity coding (near churches, walking distance to synagogue, close to the mosque) violates the 1968 religion protection. National-origin coding (authentic ethnic neighborhood, Old World charm, traditional Italian district) violates the 1968 national-origin protection. Replacement pattern under SOP 10-2: Census Bureau demographic data with inline source attribution where the reader can verify the claim against the underlying source.
Sex and familial status: 1974 and 1988 protections.
Sex-based marketing (bachelor pad, perfect for the single professional male) violates the 1974 sex amendment. Familial-status coding (perfect for families, family-friendly streets, ideal for empty nesters, mature buyers, adult-oriented community) violates the 1988 familial-status amendment. The bidirectional rule applies: welcoming-coded targeting and exclusionary-coded targeting both violate the protection. Replacement pattern: factual amenity data (parks, playgrounds, school district boundaries from state agencies) with inline source attribution. The amenity is factual; the synthesis stays third-party.
Disability: 1988 protection and accessibility-claim discipline.
Disability-coded marketing on non-exempt housing (must climb stairs, no wheelchair access, perfect for active adults only) violates the 1988 disability amendment. Marketing copy describing a building's actual accessibility features is permitted when the claim matches the building's real features. The 1988 amendment also added accessibility requirements for new multifamily construction; marketing-claim discipline applies in both directions. Replacement pattern: factual accessibility-feature description (step-free entry, elevator access, ADA-compliant doorways) when the feature is real.
The SOP 10-2 four-criterion attribution test.
Sources qualify under SOP 10-2 when they are recognized (named and known to the public), reliable (methodology published, cadence known), independent (not the agent, the brokerage, or a vendor of the agent), and impartial (the source does not benefit from the rating). Census Bureau, Walk Score, state Department of Education boundary data, public transit authority data all qualify. Parent-rated school review aggregations fail the impartiality test because the review surface correlates with the demographic composition of the area. Inline attribution at the point of claim (Walkability: 72 of 100, source Walk Score) is the disclosure format.
What operators ask about words to avoid and the safe-harbor pattern when they audit their neighborhood content.
[ 01 ] What categories of words and phrases should be stripped from neighborhood and listing copy? +
[ 02 ] What counts as a recognized, reliable, independent source under NAR SOP 10-2? +
[ 03 ] How visible does the third-party attribution have to be on the page? +
If your neighborhood pages were written against a words-to-avoid list without the SOP 10-2 replacement pattern, the rewrite work is still ahead of you. Book a Fair Housing diagnostic.
We audit every neighborhood page, every relocation guide, and every market-report surface against the six prohibited-phrase categories and the SOP 10-2 four-criterion attribution test. Output is the per-claim ledger of which lines stay (third-party-sourced with inline attribution), which lines rewrite (lexical violations replaced with factual data), and which lines come out entirely. Funnels into our /fair-housing-safe-seo/ retainer when the rewrite runs across more than a few dozen pages.