A practical draft review checklist for modern newsrooms

A draft is not finished because it is written. It is finished when an editor has checked the facts, the structure, the names, the numbers, and the legal risks. Most newsroom errors happen because the final review is a single nervous read before publishing. A better system breaks that review into five short passes, and each pass has exactly one job: confirm the lead, test attribution, check the structure, count the numbers, and leave the writer a clear next step.

This guide explains those five passes in order and gives you a review template you can adapt for a local newsroom, a trade publication, or a small editorial team.

Pass one: confirm the lead and the deadline

Start by reading only the first paragraph. Does it tell the reader who did what, when, where, and why it matters? If the lead says “last week” while the rest of the draft describes an event from this month, stop. The same problem appears in digital news when an old date sits under a new headline and undermines reader trust.

In a city council story, verify the date of the meeting and the deadline for the final vote. If the deadline changed during the discussion, that change belongs in the lead, not at the bottom of the article. Circle every time reference in the draft and compare it with the official agenda, the meeting notice, or the reporter’s notes.

A strong lead does not need to contain every detail. It needs to make a promise to the reader about the main news. If the lead promises a budget decision and the body only describes a committee discussion, that is a structure problem you should catch before anything else.

Pass two: match every claim to a source

Underline every claim that needs support: numbers, quotes, names, legal conclusions, and descriptions of what someone said. Then ask: is this from a document, an interview, an email, a recording, or a public record? If you cannot answer, mark the claim as HOLD.

A statement like “the commission approved the budget” needs a resolution number, a named commissioner, or an official record. A quote needs an identified speaker and exact wording. If the quote cannot be checked against the interview notes, send it back to the reporter.

A small source table can make this pass faster. Keep one in the shared editorial file so every draft uses the same standard.

Pass three: read only the section headings

Most digital readers scan before they read. That means the draft has to work as a series of headings even if every paragraph is polished. Collect the section headings and read them as a list. If the list does not tell a story, the body will not work either.

In a news article, the headings should move from the main event to context, reaction, and consequence. If a heading repeats the lead, delete it. If a heading jumps back in time, consider moving the section or adding a transition.

This pass also helps you see repeated paragraphs without reading the full draft a second time. If two headings point to the same point, the writer may be repeating themselves. Mark the weaker section and ask for it to be cut or replaced with a new detail.

Pass four: count every number and name

Spell-check does not catch a wrong year, a wrong address, or a wrong percentage. Write each number from the draft on a separate line, then compare it with the original record. This includes ages, dollar figures, dates, percentages, addresses, phone numbers, and meeting times.

If the draft says the city council meets on Wednesday but the official notice says Thursday, that is not a minor style problem. It is an error that reaches readers and damages confidence in the whole article.

Names need the same level of care. A misspelled name is a fact error, not a style issue. If a source has an unusual surname, ask the reporter to confirm the spelling from identification, a voter record, or a recent public document. Also check the names of businesses, agencies, and programs. If the draft refers to “the department” but the official name is “the Office of Community Development,” use the official name at least once.

Pass five: leave one concrete next step for the writer

A review note like “please revise this” does not help a writer who is already close to a deadline. It does not tell them what is broken, what is missing, or where the problem appears. Instead, make each note specific and actionable.

For example, write: “Please revise this” is not useful. Write: “Replace ‘local residents’ in paragraph 6 with the two homeowners named in the hearing record” is useful. Or: “Add the link to the court docket next to the judge’s ruling” tells the writer exactly where a source is missing.

This approach also makes the review faster for the editor. A clear next step can be forwarded directly to the writer without a second long conversation. If the draft still requires reporting, say what reporting is missing and where it can be obtained.

Build a simple review template for your desk

Create a shared note with one line for each pass. This does not replace a careful read, but it makes the read consistent. A simple template can include four columns: the pass name, the task, the verdict, and the note for the writer.

Keep the template short so it is actually used. Most desks need only the five passes above. Add a final section for “publish conditions” to list anything that is still unresolved. Once those conditions are met, the story can move to production.

The goal is not to slow down publishing. The goal is to remove the common small errors that slip through when an editor tries to check everything at once. Try the five-pass method on the next draft in your queue and compare the result with your usual process.