How to release one conversation across several channels

A publishing brief is a one-page plan written before any editing starts. At the top sits one purpose line that every piece shares. Below it each piece gets a row: who it is for, where it goes, which minutes of the recording it uses, who checks it and whether it went out. The brief also sets the order the pieces go out in, with a date for each.

One purpose for every piece

Invented for the example: a business broker has recorded a half-hour audio interview with Sam, who sold a commercial cleaning company. The purpose line on the brief is the one from the broker's interview plan: "After listening, an owner who plans to sell within two years will know which records a buyer asks for first." A clip that serves some other purpose stays off this brief and waits for one of its own.

Every piece on the list before any cutting

The brief for the interview with Sam has five rows.

Two rules shape the list. The note to Sam can mention what Sam said off the record; the public clip cannot. Each row also names the minutes its piece came from, so whoever checks it can play that stretch of the recording.

Each piece on its own

Someone who hears the clip may never see the article or the full recording, so each piece is written to make sense without the others.

• A clip gives its context in the first seconds: who is speaking and what question they are answering.
• Every piece says where it came from, and links to the full conversation wherever the channel allows a link.
• Video carries captions, and audio-only pieces carry a transcript. The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2 put both at Level A, the lowest of the standard's three conformance levels: captions for prerecorded audio in video (success criterion 1.2.2) and a text alternative for prerecorded audio-only content (success criterion 1.2.1).
• YouTube requires creators to disclose AI that makes realistic content, such as a real person appearing to say or do something they did not, and lists AI help with scripts, titles and captions as needing no disclosure (YouTube Help).

In February 2015 the National Association of the Deaf brought a class action against Harvard in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, over online videos and audio recordings that lacked captions. Under the settlement announced on November 27, 2019, Harvard agreed to caption its new online content, including university content on its official channels on YouTube, Vimeo and SoundCloud, and to caption other content within five business days of a request (Disability Law Center, one of the plaintiffs' lawyers). The court approved the consent decree on February 26, 2020 (case record at the Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse).

Sam's brief adds one rule that no platform requires: every quote matches words Sam said on the recording.

Checked against the recording and the signed release

Before a piece moves to approved, the person checking it confirms three things against the recording and Sam's signed release. Every quote matches the recording word for word or is marked as a paraphrase. The piece uses only material the release covers. It goes only to places the release names. Sam's release refuses photos and video, so the clip runs as audio with captions and no picture of Sam.

An edit after approval sends the piece back to Sam. The clip on Sam's brief runs 55 seconds, from 06:45 to 07:40. Trimmed to 30 seconds, it can change what Sam is heard to say, so the trimmed clip counts as a new draft and waits for a new yes.

The order and the dates

The brief for Sam's interview puts the pieces in this order.

1. Sam gets the copies and the approved pieces before anyone else, with the publishing dates.
2. The long piece goes up first, so every short piece has somewhere to point.
3. The clip follows a few days later on one of the two social accounts Sam's release names.
4. The note to past clients goes out last, after the article it links to is live.

The dates and the time zone are written on the brief, next to each row.

A kit for the guest to share

Sam gets a short kit for sharing: the approved pieces, the links, the credit line and a note on where each piece may go. If the guest or a partner is paid, gets a discount or receives anything else for sharing, and their audience would not expect that connection, federal endorsement guidance calls for it to be disclosed clearly (16 C.F.R. 255.5).

What counts as sent

A row changes status only once the evidence in the last column is on file.

A scheduled post can fail to publish, so the row stays at scheduled until someone finds the post live.

When a fact turns out wrong

The Society of Professional Journalists' code of ethics asks journalists to acknowledge mistakes and correct them promptly and prominently (code of ethics). When a fact in the recording turns out to be wrong, the brief's source column shows every piece that repeats it. The broker fixes or removes each of those pieces, adds a dated correction note to the long piece and tells Sam before anyone else does.

The permissions this brief depends on are set up on the interview plan worksheet before the next conversation is recorded, and how to plan a recorded interview you can publish explains where each one comes from.

Sources

• World Wide Web Consortium, Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2, W3C Recommendation, December 12, 2024. Success criteria 1.2.1 and 1.2.2 and the three conformance levels.
• YouTube Help, Disclosing use of altered or synthetic content. The page shows no date.
• Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse, University of Michigan Law School, National Association of the Deaf v. Harvard University, No. 3:15-cv-30023 (D. Mass.).
• Disability Law Center, National Association of the Deaf announces landmark settlement with Harvard to improve online accessibility, November 27, 2019.
• Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School, 16 C.F.R. 255.5, disclosure of material connections.
• Society of Professional Journalists, Code of Ethics, revised September 6, 2014.