When AI multiplies content volume, review can't stay the same. The answer is not to review everything harder — it is to review by risk.
Risk tiers
- Low: internal drafts, resizes and translations of approved assets, social replies from approved templates. Automated checks plus a light editor review.
- Medium: new public copy and images without claims — web pages, emails, organic social, ads. Editor plus brand review.
- High: anything with performance, health, price or comparative claims; realistic AI-generated people, voices or likenesses; regulated products; sensitive topics. Brand, legal and a senior sign-off.
What good review looks like
- Automated pre-checks catch banned words, missing disclosures, superlatives, unsourced figures and reading level before a human looks.
- Humans check what machines can't: truth, taste, cultural context, rights to every image, voice and music track.
- A log: who approved what and when — useful when something is questioned later.
A real example of rules plus people
When Mondelez described its generative AI content tool in October 2025 (built with Publicis Groupe and Accenture), it said humans review all AI-generated content, and that the company prohibits content highlighting unhealthy eating, vaping, overconsumption, manipulative language and offensive stereotypes. It also said it was not using AI-generated human likenesses at that point. Reuters reported the company expected the tool to cut content production costs by 30% to 50%.
Common failure modes
- Approvers drowning in low-risk items while high-risk items wait.
- No one owns the final call on tone.
- Agencies using their own AI tools outside your rules.
Design the workflow before you scale volume, not after.