Practical core: human review is more than a quick glance. The reviewer must be able to assess the substance and change, stop or escalate the publication.
Four separate elements
Substantive review
The reviewer checks facts, context, wording, possible deception and suitability for the intended audience.
Authority
The reviewer must be able to require changes, reject content or escalate the decision.
Editorial responsibility
An identifiable person or organisation must assume responsibility for the final publication.
Documentation
A register can record who reviewed the content, when the review took place, which version was approved and what decision was made. The precise legal necessity of documentation depends on the situation; operationally, it strengthens demonstrability.
Simple workflow
- Record which AI tool and function were used.
- Assign an authorised reviewer before publication.
- Document substantive corrections and the final version.
- Determine which transparency measure is required or appropriate.
- Store the decision in a central content register.
A checkbox marked “human reviewed” is weak evidence when it is unclear who reviewed the content, what was checked and what authority that person held.
Limits
Whether a specific review is sufficient to fall within a legal exception may require legal assessment. A process register supports the reasoning but does not automatically create an exception.
Official sources
This explanation is general and does not constitute legal advice.