Basic
$199/moBelow DA/DR targetNot a fitExcluded from recommendation
AGENCY AI TRANSFORMATION
SITETRAIL CERTIFIED
Your learning path: 16 lessons.
Module 01 / Lesson 04 · Read, apply, check
Build a practical route from evidence intake to release, with visible decisions and manageable exceptions.
Use states such as evidence requested, evidence accepted, draft prepared, editorially checked, client approved and released. Each state should describe a condition that can be verified, not just someone being busy. Define the minimum input needed to move forward and the person who accepts it. A draft can be complete as a writing task while still blocked for evidence. Keeping these states separate makes the queue honest and prevents an attractive document from being mistaken for a release-ready deliverable.
Useful gates include accepting the story brief, verifying factual claims and authorizing the final version. Do not add a manager’s approval to every trivial formatting step. State what the gate checks, who owns it and what evidence records the decision. Client approval should identify the exact version, named spokesperson and intended use. If the approved facts change, return the affected sections for review. A silent assumption that approval covers every future adaptation creates avoidable disputes and damages the evidence trail.
Specify what happens when an expert is unavailable, a number conflicts or a source withdraws permission. Assign an owner and a response date, and allow a narrower story or revised deadline when the original scope cannot be supported. Limit simultaneous drafts so editors are not buried beneath automated output. Escalate based on impact and age rather than repeatedly sending generic reminders. The account lead should see which client input is blocking progress and the consequence of leaving it unresolved.
AI can prepare files, checks and handoff notes inside the authorized workflow. The release step should consume the approved version, with a record of who authorized it and where it went. For routine pre-authorized actions, define the exact scope and stop conditions; uncertain or changed material returns to a human. Retain the final artifact and distribution record. After release, maintain a correction path so a discovered error can be assessed, corrected and communicated to affected destinations without reconstructing the entire project.
Sources, scope and permissions meet the brief.
Claims, quotes, calculations and audience value pass review.
A named approver accepts the exact material and intended use.
The approved version reaches the recorded destination.
An illustrative agency builds a seven-state board for a client case study. The intake owner requests a customer interview and implementation dates. The editor accepts the evidence pack only after the outcome measure and quote permissions are recorded. AI prepares a draft, and the editor links each substantive claim to its source. The client approves version 1.3 for the agreed article and pitch. Before release, the account lead notices that a new product description was inserted after approval. That section returns for review instead of being treated as a harmless formatting change. The approved final file is then used for outreach, and its destination log remains attached. A later correction to a date can be traced to every affected version and recipient.
Another team uses a single status called “done.” The writer means drafted, the editor means checked for grammar and the account manager means approved by the client. AI generates several adaptations from an older copy while the client reviews a newer one. Nobody can identify which version was released. More reminders cannot fix this confusion because the workflow lacks distinct acceptance conditions and a single accountable owner at each transition.
Approval gates are useful only when they represent a meaningful decision. Too many gates create waiting time; too few allow uncertainty to pass downstream. Start with a small number and measure queue delays and defects. If the same issue repeatedly returns from a late gate, improve the earlier intake or briefing step instead of adding another final approver.
Client approval does not make a false claim accurate or guarantee an independent publisher will accept the story. Keep factual verification and commercial approval distinct. Urgent corrections, sensitive claims and materially changed evidence need a named escalation route, even when routine preparation and administrative handoffs are automated.
Do this today · 30 minutes
Create a workflow board for one client case study.
A document or spreadsheet and the illustrative case in this lesson. Use synthetic or already approved material for practice; no paid account or real client data is required.
Before: Sources, scope and permissions meet the brief.
After: The approved version reaches the recorded destination.
Notes stay in this browser. Download a copy to keep them.
Test this worksheet on one bounded assignment. Record the reviewer’s findings, revise the method and assign the next review date.
Before you move on
A client approved an article yesterday, but today the team inserts a new performance claim before sending it to a publication. The new sentence sounds consistent with the approved story. Which workflow decision is required before release?
Next lesson →Associated Press: newsroom standards for AI
PRSA: professional ethics resources
Lesson edition 1.0 · References reviewed 16 October 2026 · Practical exercise reviewed 16 October 2026. Examples are illustrative teaching scenarios.
Sitetrail service · NewsPass
Put your SEO, PR and generative engine optimization strategy into practice. NewsPass supports search visibility, media presence, brand credibility and discoverability in AI answers.
Compare the delivery costs for your campaign using the same calculator as the Sitetrail homepage. Choose a target authority range, your typical placement cost and expected monthly volume.
Illustrative cost comparison using October 2026 plan prices; check current terms before purchase. Assumes one eligible placement per credit and comparable selected opportunities, not a prediction of rankings, revenue, coverage or AI citations. Actual suitability depends on audience fit, editorial requirements and the current plan terms. DA/DR are third-party metrics, not Google scores.
Choose publications available on your plan, prepare useful content for the audience and submit it for editorial review. Track accepted placements in your dashboard and evaluate them against your campaign goals.
Original evidence. Human editorial judgment.
Use the worksheets to turn each lesson into a real decision. Improve the method as you learn from client evidence, editorial checks and delivery results.
Course outline · Free assessment · Privacy
No account is required. Progress, first-attempt lesson answers, worksheets and assessment results are stored in this browser when storage is available. They do not sync across devices. Download copies to retain them; clearing browser data removes local records.
Your free trial starts automatically. No license key is needed yet.