How to review pitches and quotes without strangling them

Review communication according to its risk, purpose, and decision rights. A media pitch needs a fast check for relevance, accuracy, evidence, confidentiality, and source availability. A regulated announcement may require formal legal and executive approval. Applying the same review process to both creates either avoidable delay or unacceptable risk.

Agree on the review standard before drafts arrive

Define who may approve facts, claims, customer references, financial information, legal language, security details, executive quotations, and brand expression. Also define which routine materials an authorized operator may send within an approved message and evidence set.

The PRSA Code of Ethics calls for accurate and truthful communication and prompt correction of erroneous communication. A review process should make those duties easier to perform.

Review the highest-consequence questions first

Use this order:

Truth. Is each factual statement current, supportable, and attributed to a source?
Permission. May the company use the customer name, data, image, quotation, document, or confidential information?
Material risk. Does legal, regulatory, safety, security, employment, financial, or contractual review apply?
Relevance. Does the material answer the recipient's likely question and explain why it matters now?
Comprehension. Can a reader understand the claim, evidence, conditions, and limits?
Voice. Would the named speaker use and defend the language?
Mechanics. Are names, links, dates, attachments, contact details, formatting, and delivery rules correct?

Do not preserve a strong line that overstates the evidence. Do not add qualifiers that hide the actual point. Rewrite the claim so its precision matches the source.

Different materials need different decision rights

Material	Typical review focus	Possible approver
Routine reporter pitch	Relevance, facts, evidence, source access	Program owner within approved boundaries
Executive quote	Accuracy, expertise, authentic voice	Named executive and factual owner
Customer example	Permission, data, attribution, scope	Customer owner and legal when required
Product claim	Availability, test method, limits	Product or technical owner
Financial announcement	Transaction status, material facts, required process	Finance, counsel, authorized executive
Incident response	Safety, affected people, verified facts, notification duties	Incident lead, counsel, designated communicator

The company and provider should adapt this table to the actual risk system. “Founder approves everything” is a temporary fallback.

Comments should identify the problem and the source

Replace preference-only edits with an actionable note:

“The source sheet lists 18%, not 20%. Use the measured figure.”
“We do not have permission to name this customer. Remove the name or obtain written approval.”
“The first paragraph does not explain the consequence for this reporter's audience.”
“I cannot defend this prediction in an interview. Attribute it as a scenario and state the assumptions.”

Allow the writer to solve the language problem unless a precise required statement applies. Preserve a record of material decisions and approved facts so later drafts do not reopen settled questions.

Service levels should match the opportunity and risk

Set target review times by material type and escalation path. A reactive media request can expire quickly. A planned announcement should provide enough time for substantive review. An emergency may require a designated on-call approver. When the deadline cannot be met, the owner should narrow the claim, change the channel, ask for more time, or decline.

Approval workflows covers the full decision map. Media training prepares spokespeople to use approved evidence without reciting a script.