Pre-publish fact checking: what the check can see, and what happens after you publish
Most results for this search are free prompts, copy-paste skills or single-purpose tools. This page is for the editor with a draft in hand: what to check, who decides, what the check can't see, and what comes after launch.
Key takeaways
- A pre-publish check reads a draft, pulls out the claims that can be checked, and tells the editor which ones need a source or a rewrite.
- It can't confirm quotes against your recording, judge opinion, replace a legal read, or tell you a page that passes today will still be right next year.
- Veritas runs the pre-publish check and then keeps re-checking live pages, so the claims you cleared don't go stale unnoticed.
A pre-publish fact checking tool is what you want when you have a near-final draft and need it checked before it goes live. The search results are a mix of free prompts to paste into a chatbot, skills for coding assistants, a few vendor tools and a news item about detecting AI-made media. Very few say what the check covers or when it runs.
This page is a plain guide, checked on 2 November 2026 against published standards and against what each tool says about itself. It also shows where Veritas fits and where it doesn't.
What a pre-publish check does
A pre-publish check is a first pass on a draft. It extracts the statements that can be checked, looks for evidence for each one, and reports back so a person can decide.
Names, numbers, dates, who holds a role, quotes, events, scientific and medical facts, comparisons and superlatives.
Prefer primary sources over other articles that repeat the claim.
Mark each claim as supported, contradicted, outdated, misleading or unverifiable, with the source.
The editor accepts the change, rewrites the sentence or cuts the claim.
Opinion and prediction aren't claims in this sense. A good check skips them.
What editorial standards say about checking
Newsroom standards describe checking as a process with owners, not a tool. We cite only the pages we could read.
Material must be checked to achieve due accuracy, and content prepared some time before publication must be checked to make sure it has not been overtaken by events (guidelines 3.4.6 and 3.4.33).
Its ethical journalism handbook calls detailed fact-checking with a source before publication acceptable and encouraged, but says staff should not normally share drafts with outsiders. A tool that uploads a draft to a third party is a policy question for your desk.
Anything in the report that could reasonably be disputed should be attributed. Its page doesn't describe a separate pre-publication gate.
In the magazine model the writer annotates a copy citing the source for every fact and a fact-checker reads it line by line. In the newspaper model there is usually no dedicated fact-checker, and a copy editor may do a light check on basic information.
None of these pages says an automated tool may serve as the gate. They define 'pass' as every fact sourced, attributed or cut, never as 'no flags'.
Where the check sits in your workflow
The step you choose decides who sees the flags and what it costs to act on them.
The writer sees flags while the story is still easy to change. Good for catching the sentence a source never said.
The editor or copy desk clears the flags as the last step. This is the gate most teams mean by pre-publish.
Pages are re-checked on a schedule, because facts change after the draft was cleared.
The BBC rule above is the reason for the third step. Even inside a single organisation, a gap between checking and publishing is a reason to check again.
What a pre-publish check can't see
Tools that publish limits are worth more than ones that don't. These come from what the tools and standards themselves say.
Only your recording or notes show what someone said. Checking whether a quote appears online isn't the same thing.
The check covers facts, never the argument.
Source files and recordings sit with the writer, which is why the KSJ handbook has the writer supply them.
Stories that accuse someone of wrongdoing still need an editor's close read and, in the NYT's description, the lawyers.
A highlighted statement may be correct. Originality.ai's help page says highlights do not necessarily mean the information is incorrect.
Checking whether media is real or machine-made is a different job from checking facts.
What other tools say about themselves
We read each tool's own pages, so these are their claims, not our tests.
Its Fact and Hallucination Checker highlights statements that may need checking from pasted or uploaded content.
Paste or attach a draft and get a comment on each checkable claim. Its page says it can't confirm quotes and doesn't replace an editor.
Several results are text you paste into a chatbot or install in a coding assistant. One says plainly that it does not look anything up.
Most of these take a paste or an upload. None of the pages we read describes re-checking a page after it is published.
See which facts on your site have gone out of date.
Request early accessWhy a passed draft can still go stale
A draft that clears today can be wrong in a year. A role changes hands, a figure is revised, a rule takes effect. The page is still live and nobody is looking at it.
That is the second half of the problem. The pre-publish gate answers 'is this right now?'. A re-check answers 'is it still right?'.
You catch errors at launch and miss the ones that arrive later.
You catch drift but publish new errors for the first scan to find.
The claims you cleared are re-checked, and the editor gets only what has changed.
How Veritas fits
Veritas is an autonomous fact-maintenance agent for publishers. It has a pre-publish check and keeps working after launch.
Check a draft for claims and evidence before it goes live.
It looks for evidence on the web and excludes your own pages, so a page can't confirm itself. It prefers primary sources and the trusted domains a publisher lists.
Supported, contradicted, outdated, misleading or unverifiable, each with citations.
Anything that needs attention appears with the evidence and a suggested rewrite that can be applied in one click.
Pages are re-checked at 7, 45 or 365 days depending on the claim type, and an issue closes itself when the sentence changes.
High-severity findings can go to Slack or a webhook.
A short checklist for editors
Use this whether or not you use a tool.
Names, numbers, dates, titles, quotes, superlatives.
Primary where possible.
The KSJ handbook includes these in its best-practice checklist.
A tool can't do this.
Allegations go to a legal read.
The BBC asks for records that allow double-checking.
Decide when the page will be looked at again.
Honest limitsWhen Veritas isn't the right fit
Veritas isn't the right fit if you want a tool that checks quotes against your recordings, detects AI-made text or images, or replaces a legal review. It doesn't do those things.
It also isn't a way to skip your editorial process. It flags claims and offers evidence; an editor decides.
How Veritas works
- Finds your pagesReads your sitemaps, Google News sitemaps and RSS or Atom feeds on a schedule.
- Pulls out the claimsStatistics, dates, who holds a role, quotes, events. Opinion is skipped.
- Checks the evidenceSearches outside your site and prefers primary sources.
- Hands editors the fixConfident findings only, with citations and a one-click rewrite.
Frequently asked questions
What is a pre-publish fact checking tool?
Software that reads a draft, picks out the claims that can be checked, looks for evidence and flags the ones that need a source or a rewrite before the page goes live.
Does it replace a human fact-checker or editor?
No. Standards pages describe checking as a process with owners, and the tools we read say the same. A tool is a first pass; a person decides.
Can it confirm my quotes?
Not reliably. Only your recording or notes show what someone said. A tool can check whether a quote appears elsewhere, which is not the same.
What does passing a check mean?
In the standards we read it means every fact is sourced, attributed or cut. It doesn't mean there were no flags.
Is a pre-publish check the same as AI detection?
No. AI detection asks whether text or media was machine-made. A fact check asks whether the claims are true.
What happens to a page after it passes?
Facts can change after launch. Veritas re-checks live pages at 7, 45 or 365 days depending on the claim type.
Can I run a draft through Veritas before it goes live?
Yes. Veritas has a pre-publish check, so claims in a draft can be reviewed before the page goes live.
Keep every page true
Veritas re-checks the facts across your published pages and hands editors a sourced fix when one goes stale.
Request early accessRelated guides
- A fact checking tool for editors who answer for everything that's publishedMost tools sold as a fact checking tool for editors check one draft at a time. Editors are responsible for much more: copy from many contributors, headlines, corrections and every story already in the archive. Veritas keeps checking that published work and puts the problems in one queue.
- Content decay tool: catch the facts going stale, not just the trafficA content decay tool usually tells you which pages lost clicks. Veritas works one step earlier: it re-checks the claims on your pages and flags the statistics, dates and facts that have gone out of date, often before rankings move.
- AI fact checker for articles: check the draft, then keep checkingAn AI fact checker for articles can flag shaky claims in a draft, but it checks once. Veritas adds the other half: a pre-publish check, then scheduled re-checks that flag claims gone stale on pages already live.
- An outdated content detector that checks the facts, not the datesMost tools sold as an outdated content detector flag pages by age or by falling traffic. Veritas reads each page, pulls out the checkable claims and tests them against current sources, so you see which sentence went stale and why.
6 sources, checked 2 November 2026
- BBC Editorial Guidelines: Accuracy (seen 2026-11-02)
- New York Times: Ethical Journalism handbook (seen 2026-11-02)
- Associated Press: Telling the Story (2024-02-07)
- KSJ Science Editing Handbook: The fact-checking process (2020)
- Originality.ai help: Fact and Hallucination Checker (updated 2026-09-30)
- River: Fact-check comment adder (seen 2026-11-02)