Ask the receiving publisher for its current AI-content requirements before final delivery. A production platform’s usage rights do not establish whether a broadcaster, publication, educational organisation or campaign partner will accept the video. Treat each destination as a separate review, even when the creative is unchanged.
Identify the actual receiving destination
Record the organisation, publication channel, commissioning contact and person authorised to resolve requirements. “For social media” is too broad when several organisations may publish the same asset under different arrangements.
Ask for the applicable written requirements and their date. If guidance arrives by email, preserve it with the delivery record and identify any unanswered questions.
For an Indian multilingual campaign, list each language version. Ask whether the receiving team needs translated disclosures, separate factual review or language-specific approval rather than assuming one English sign-off covers everything.
Complete a destination-requirements checklist
Use these questions without presuming any particular publisher’s policy:
- Must AI assistance be disclosed, and in what wording or location?
- What production history or provenance information is requested?
- Which asset permissions must be documented?
- Are identifiable people, synthetic voices or reconstructed events subject to additional review?
- Who approves factual claims and contextual explanations?
- Are there requirements for captions, credits or accompanying descriptions?
- What export and delivery materials are expected?
- Who resolves exceptions, and what evidence confirms acceptance?
Mark each answer as documented, awaiting confirmation or not applicable with a reason. Do not fill gaps using another publisher’s requirements.
Compare two hypothetical delivery packs
Hypothetical example: a fictional studio makes a 50-second water-conservation video for an educational event and a partner’s online publication. The event organiser asks for a production note; the online partner requests its own review of synthetic narration and factual claims.
Create two delivery checklists linked to the same master version. The event’s approval does not answer the partner’s outstanding questions. If a Hindi cutdown changes a factual qualification, reopen that claim review as well.
Evaluate readiness by asking whether each destination’s requested evidence is present and tied to the exact export. A polished video with an incomplete delivery pack remains unfinished for that destination.
Hold delivery when acceptance is uncertain
Stop labelling the work “ready to publish” if a material destination requirement remains unanswered. Next, obtain written clarification or deliver explicitly for review, with unresolved items clearly listed.
If comparing production services in the AI tools catalog, check access format and save offer terms before buying. Marketplace account/code/token offers are not proof of official subscription equivalence or publisher acceptance.
Sources and scope
Source material checked 29 October 2026; features/policies may change. Runway usage rights establishes the bounded user–Runway ownership statement, no Runway-imposed non-commercial restrictions on generations, and no formal credit requirement. That credit statement does not establish a publisher’s disclosure requirements. The destination checklist and examples are editorial advice; no publisher policy was supplied.