---
platform: universal
format: content-review
constraints:
  max_chars: null
  image_ratio: null
  max_hashtags: null
---

# Best Practices: Content Review and Quality Assurance

## Core Principles

A content review is not just proofreading — it is a structured quality gate that ensures accuracy, brand alignment, strategic fit, and platform appropriateness before publication.

- Review with fresh eyes: wait at least 30 minutes after writing before reviewing.
- Review for the reader, not the writer — what the audience will understand matters more than what the author intended.
- Use a checklist, not memory — cognitive load causes reviewers to miss consistent categories of errors.

## Review Layers

### Layer 1: Structural Review
- Does the piece fulfill its stated objective?
- Is the structure logical and easy to navigate?
- Is the hook strong enough for the platform?
- Is the CTA clear, singular, and appropriate?

### Layer 2: Accuracy Review
- Are all statistics cited with a source and date?
- Are all factual claims verifiable?
- Are product names, brand names, and prices correct?
- Are there any legal or compliance risks (unverified health claims, competitor comparisons, testimonials)?

### Layer 3: Brand and Voice Review
- Does the tone match the brand voice guide?
- Are brand-specific terminology and spellings consistent?
- Is the content appropriate for the audience (reading level, cultural sensitivity)?

### Layer 4: Platform Review
- Does the format meet platform constraints (character limits, image specs, hashtag counts)?
- Is the content optimized for the platform's algorithm (SEO keywords, engagement triggers)?
- Are links, tags, and mentions correct?

### Layer 5: Copy Edit
- Grammar, spelling, and punctuation
- Sentence flow and readability (aim for Flesch-Kincaid Grade 7–9 for general audiences)
- Consistency in tense, voice, and formatting

## Structure (Review Report)

```
[CONTENT TITLE / ID]
[REVIEWER NAME]
[REVIEW DATE]
[PLATFORM AND FORMAT]

[SUMMARY VERDICT]
- Status: Approved / Approved with changes / Requires revision / Rejected
- Priority issues: [list]

[STRUCTURAL NOTES]
[ACCURACY FLAGS]
[BRAND ALIGNMENT NOTES]
[PLATFORM COMPLIANCE NOTES]
[COPY EDITS — inline or attached]

[REVISION REQUIRED BY (date)]
```

## Guidelines

- Never approve content with unverified statistics or missing source citations.
- Flag but do not unilaterally change strategic decisions — escalate to the content strategist.
- Use a shared annotation tool (Google Docs comments, Notion inline comments) to keep feedback traceable.
- Distinguish between required changes and suggested improvements — use clear labels.
- Final approval requires sign-off from at least one reviewer who did not write the content.
- For regulated industries (health, finance, legal), require specialist compliance review before publishing.

## Review Checklist Template

```
[ ] Objective clearly met
[ ] Hook appropriate for platform
[ ] One clear CTA
[ ] All facts cited with source + date
[ ] No unverifiable claims
[ ] Brand voice consistent
[ ] No competitor disparagement without legal clearance
[ ] Platform constraints met (chars, image specs, hashtags)
[ ] SEO/algorithm elements present (keywords, alt text)
[ ] Grammar and spelling clean
[ ] All links functional
[ ] Author bio / attribution correct (if applicable)
[ ] Legal/compliance sign-off (if required)
```
