How should content be checked before it publishes?

Content should pass two checks before it publishes: a fact check that traces every claim to a primary source or to the business's own approved records, and a review by someone inside the business who knows the work (in regulated fields, a licensed professional or compliance staff). Editing for style comes after both. Keep a record of what was checked, against what, and who approved it.

Drafts now arrive faster than ever, often with help from AI tools, and a fluent draft is easy to mistake for a correct one. The cost of an error lands on the business whose name is on the page, not on the writer.

This is a content-process guide for business owners in any industry. In law, health care and financial services, the firm's counsel or compliance team sets the review rules; see writing for law, medical and financial firms for the questions to bring them.

Why accuracy needs its own pass

Google's guidance on helpful content asks directly, "Does the content have any easily-verified factual errors?" When it discusses what makes content reliable, it also says "trust is most important." A page with a wrong service area or an invented statistic fails a reader long before it fails anything else.

AI-assisted drafting adds a specific risk. NIST's Generative AI Profile defines confabulation as "the production of confidently stated but erroneous or false content," and notes that outputs can include confabulated citations that purport to justify an answer. Edited is not the same as checked. A careful line edit can make a wrong sentence read better while leaving it just as wrong, which is why the fact check runs as its own pass, before polish, with its own reviewer when possible.

Sort the claims before checking them

Different claims need different evidence, so the first step is to list every factual statement in the draft and label it. The table shows a workable sorting.

The last row catches the most trouble. A draft that says "same-day service" or "we'll get you approved" makes a promise someone has to keep, and only the owner can decide whether to make it.

What counts as a primary source

A primary source is the original: the statute or regulation itself, the regulator's guidance, the platform's documentation, the study's own report, or the business's own records. A news article or another company's blog about any of those is a lead, useful for finding the primary source and not a substitute for it. When the primary source cannot be found or cannot be read, the claim is cut or rewritten to something that can be supported.

For each checked claim, log the URL or record, the date it was read, and a short quote of the passage that supports it. That log does two jobs: it lets a reviewer confirm the check in minutes, and it shows what to recheck when a rule or a policy changes. When the source is the business itself, the writer should not have to invent what the business knows; the claim goes back to the person who knows, with the exact sentence attached, and comes back confirmed or corrected.

Who reviews what

A subject expert reads for meaning. The question is not whether the sentence is well written but whether it is true for this business, stated with the right conditions, and free of promises the business does not make. That reviewer should see the claim list beside the draft, so they approve facts rather than skim prose.

Sign-off has to sit with someone who has the authority to give it. Before a provider sends the first draft, settle one internal question: "Who here is allowed to approve a promise about price, timing or results, and who is only allowed to comment?" Writing that answer down prevents the common failure where a draft is approved by whoever replied first. In regulated fields, the answer is set by rule or firm policy, not by convenience.

A fictional example: three errors in one draft

A fictional HVAC company in Ohio receives a draft service page for heat pump installation. The claim list catches three problems. The draft says the company is licensed in three states; its records show two. It promises same-day service; the company offers that on weekdays only, and only for repairs. And it cites a percentage about energy savings attributed to "industry research," with no source the editor can trace to an original study or agency release.

Each fix is different. The license claim is corrected from the company's records. The same-day promise is rewritten with the owner to say exactly what the company does. The statistic is cut, because no primary source supports it, and the paragraph is rewritten to explain how the company sizes a system instead. The page that publishes is shorter and less flashy at first glance, and every sentence on it is one the company can stand behind.

How Hudson South checks content

At Hudson South, every factual claim is checked against a primary source before a piece goes to the client for review. Facts about the business come from the Authority Asset, the first of four steps, which produces a written record of the expertise the business already has. Hudson Twenty-One, Market Intelligence and AEO Creation follow, and the client reviews each page or post before Hudson South publishes it. In law, health care and financial services, the licensed professional or the business's compliance staff approves what is published, and Hudson South does not give legal, medical or financial advice.

For the voice side of the same review, see our article on AI content that still sounds like your business. The full service is on the AI search content page.

Put your pages through a second read

On a free 30-minute call, we compare your site with the competitors your buyers also look at and walk through the gaps between them.

Sources

1. Creating helpful, reliable, people-first content. Google Search Central. Read 2026-10-17.
2. Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework: Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile (NIST AI 600-1). National Institute of Standards and Technology. Read 2026-10-17.