Step 1
Extract the claims
Every checkable statement listed, which is usually more than the writer thought they had made.
AI-assisted workflows · Human QA and fact-checking · Sydney
Human QA and fact-checking
The specific risk these tools introduce is not bad writing. It is fluent, confident, well-structured wrongness, which passes review far more easily than something clumsy and true.
Grab the snowball. Give it a spin, and watch it grow as you scroll. Just like the standard.
4checks every claim has to pass
1named person, not a queue
Traceableevery figure back to a source
Before publishnot after somebody notices
The short answer
What does human QA actually check?
Human QA and fact-checking is verifying, before publication, that every factual claim is true, every figure traces to a source, every quote is accurate, and the piece is consistent with what you have said elsewhere. It is a distinct stage with a named person, not a glance from whoever is available.
It matters more now than it used to. Assisted drafting produces text that is fluent, confident and structurally correct regardless of whether it is true, which defeats the informal check most organisations relied on: does this read like somebody who knew what they were talking about.
So checking has to be explicit and named, or it silently stops happening. It sits inside our wider AI-assisted workflows service, and because our Snowball SEO platform automates the search heavy lifting other agencies bill by the hour, more of your budget goes into verification.
The difference
What does a claim actually have to pass?
Four checks, and they are not interchangeable. A claim can be accurately quoted from a source that is itself wrong, and that passes three of the four.
What gets checked
- Every figure, traced to a primary source rather than to someone quoting it
- Whether that source is still current, which is the commonest failure
- Whether the figure means what the sentence says it means
- Consistency with what you have already published elsewhere
What is not checking
- A read-through by whoever is free, which catches tone and not truth
- Trusting a citation because it looks like one
- Checking the piece against itself rather than against the world
- Approval, which is a different act with a different purpose
Where checking sits in the wider process is covered by our AI-assisted production work.
The cost
What drives the price of checking?
Claim density and how regulated the subject is. A page with four figures is quick; a page with forty, in a regulated category, is a different job entirely.
Per piece
Ad hoc
Checking on individual pieces where the risk is highest, which is where most clients start.
A standing check
Ongoing
Every piece checked before publication, with a named person and a recorded result, which is what makes it reliable rather than occasional.
Checking and standards
Set up
The standard written down, the checkers trained, and the records kept, for teams who will run it themselves.
We quote by claim density and subject after a free consult. In regulated categories we will say plainly where our checking stops and where you need professional advice instead.
What moves the number, in order
- How many checkable claims a piece contains
- How regulated the subject is, which multiplies everything
- Whether primary sources are accessible or behind paywalls
- Whether claims about your own work need internal verification
- How much of it is time-sensitive and will need rechecking
- Whether records have to be kept for compliance
The check that saves the most is currency
Most factual failures in business content are not invented figures. They are figures that were correct when somebody first used them and have been copied forward for four years.
A statistic from a 2021 report, quoted by a blog in 2023, cited by a competitor in 2024 and used by you in 2026, is now three removes from a source that has since been superseded. Nobody lied and the sentence is wrong.
So we trace to primary sources and record the date, which is dull work and is the single highest-return part of checking.
The scope
What you receive
A checked piece, and a record that shows what was checked and against what.
The checked piece
Every claim verified or flagged, with anything unverifiable either removed or clearly attributed rather than quietly kept.
A source record
Each figure traced to a primary source with a date, kept, so a claim can be defended or updated a year later.
A consistency pass
Against what you have already published, because contradicting your own earlier page is a specific and avoidable embarrassment.
A recheck schedule
Which claims will date and roughly when, so time-sensitive figures are revisited on purpose.
Rewrites where needed
A claim that cannot be verified is usually salvageable with a more careful sentence rather than by deletion.
The standard, written
What your team checks and how, so this survives the person currently doing it.
The return
How does checking stay in the process?
By being named, resourced and recorded. Every organisation intends to check. The ones that actually do are the ones where it has a name against it.
Record it, or it did not happen
A recorded check is worth more than a thorough unrecorded one, because it survives the person, proves diligence if a claim is challenged, and makes the recheck possible when a figure ages.
It also changes behaviour. Checking that leaves a trace gets done properly, and checking that leaves none gets skipped on the days it matters most, which are always the busy ones.
So the record is part of the deliverable rather than an administrative extra, and it is the part clients are most often surprised to find useful.
The process
How checking runs
A day or two per piece depending on claim density, or built into the production workflow.
Step 2
Trace to primary
Not to whoever quoted it. Most failures are figures copied forward from a source that has since been superseded.
Step 3
Check currency
The date of the source and whether it still holds, which is the check that fails most often.
Step 4
Check the reading
Whether the figure means what the sentence claims it means, because misreadings survive citation perfectly well.
Step 5
Consistency
Against your own published material, so a new page does not contradict one you wrote two years ago.
Step 6
Record and schedule
What was checked, against what, on what date, and when each time-sensitive claim needs revisiting.
The brief
What to ask before you rely on checking
Everybody says they check. These four questions distinguish the ones who do.
Who is named?
A person, not a team and not a stage in a diagram. Checking that is everybody's responsibility is nobody's, reliably.
Do you trace to primary sources?
Or to whoever quoted the figure? Most factual failures in business content are correct quotations of superseded sources.
Is the result recorded?
Unrecorded checking cannot be defended if a claim is challenged, cannot be rechecked when a figure ages, and does not survive the person who did it.
What happens to a claim you cannot verify?
It should be removed or carefully attributed, never quietly kept. Ask, because the quiet keeping is the default under deadline.
We are happy to answer all four. In regulated categories we will also tell you plainly where our checking stops and where you need professional advice instead.
Start here
Ready to know it is true?
Send us something you published recently that contains figures. The free consult is a working session, not a sales call, and you leave with three things whether or not you book us.
- That piece checked, with every claim traced or flagged
- An honest read on how many of your figures are current
- A fixed price by claim density, with the record-keeping included
Good questions
Human QA and fact-checking FAQs
What does fact-checking actually involve?
Verifying before publication that every factual claim is true, every figure traces to a primary source, every quote is accurate and in context, and the piece is consistent with what you have published elsewhere. It is a distinct stage with a named person.
Why does this matter more now?
Because assisted drafting produces text that is fluent, confident and structurally correct regardless of whether it is true. That defeats the informal check most organisations relied on, which was whether something read like it was written by somebody who knew the subject.
What fails most often?
Currency. Not invented figures, but real figures that were correct years ago and have been copied forward through several intermediaries since. Nobody lied, and the sentence is still wrong.
How much does checking cost?
We quote by claim density and subject. What moves it is how many checkable claims a piece contains, how regulated the subject is, whether primary sources are accessible, and whether records must be kept for compliance.
Can this be automated?
Parts of it: finding claims, spotting inconsistencies and flagging things that look unsupported. The judgement about whether a source is adequate and whether a figure has been read correctly is a person's, and it is the part that matters.
What if a claim cannot be verified?
It should be removed or carefully attributed, never quietly kept. Under deadline the default is to keep it and hope, which is precisely why the stage needs a name and a record.
Do you check claims about our own results?
We verify them internally with you, and we will not publish a result nobody in your business can evidence. That is a harder conversation than checking a public statistic and a more important one.
Does this cover legal compliance?
No, and we say so explicitly. We check factual accuracy and flag anything that looks like it needs professional review. In regulated categories the legal check is a separate obligation and we will tell you where ours stops.