---
title: "Run a pre-publication defamation review of the draft copy"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/defamation-and-media-law/run-a-pre-publication-defamation-review-of-the-draft-copy"
type: "task"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A33-T1-R11"
practice_area: "Defamation & Media Law"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
last_reviewed: "2026-10-22"
---

# Run a pre-publication defamation review of the draft copy

> Flag statements that may defame identified people, list candidate meanings and note where the file has no support.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/defamation-and-media-law/run-a-pre-publication-defamation-review-of-the-draft-copy  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-22

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Defamation & Media Law](https://ailawframework.com/practice/defamation-and-media-law.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | Flag statements that may defame identified people, list candidate meanings and note where the file has no support. |
| What the lawyer must review | Identify every person the copy is about, including unnamed but identifiable people Remember sign-off creates publication risk |
| Written for / versions | 1 jurisdiction versions below |

## Checking plan

**Lawyer-led judgement**

The lawyer makes the substantive assessment. Any permitted AI assistance remains supporting work with its own checks.

- What the AI does: Potential support includes preparing preliminary structure or wording and identifying points for review. Confirm the tool’s capability and permitted scope.
- What the lawyer does: Set the scope, verify the evidence, resolve exceptions and approve the final output for its intended use.
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Suggested checking approach based on the task guidance. Complete the assessment for the actual tool, information and jurisdiction.
- Why: The plan reflects the described work and review requirements. Policy colours are not used to determine permission or checking.
- Restriction: The lawyer makes the substantive assessment. Any permitted AI assistance remains supporting work with its own checks.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Confirm that the actual tool, feature and processing terms permit use of this information, including access, retention, training and disclosure conditions.
2. Confirm instructions and personal circumstances through appropriate direct engagement. Have the responsible lawyer assess safety, capacity or vulnerability concerns and escalation.
3. Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
4. Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.

## Notes

- Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts. The checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.

## Jurisdiction versions

| Jurisdiction | Level |
| --- | --- |
| [United States](https://ailawframework.com/practice/defamation-and-media-law/run-a-pre-publication-defamation-review-of-the-draft-copy/united-states.md) | Yellow |

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*