AI. Judgment. Responsibility.
Who checks what AI gets wrong?
The useful question is how an AI draft becomes work you can stand behind. Give the process reliable inputs, editorial judgment and a named person responsible for approval.
Give the output an owner.
A convincing sentence can contain an unsupported claim. A smooth translation can change a technical meaning. An apparently harmless prompt can include information that should have stayed inside the organisation. Treat review as a defined stage of the workflow, with access to the original sources and the authority to return the work for correction.
Source
Approved information
Draft
A defined task
Review
Evidence and meaning
Approve
A named owner
Put the thinking to work
Before this draft goes public
Record the checks you have completed. Unchecked items remain actions for the responsible reviewer. This is a working checklist, not an automated assessment of accuracy.
A situation worth examining
A technical article may read well while confusing a product capability with a planned feature. The reviewer returns to the approved product documentation, corrects the wording and asks the specialist to confirm it before publication.