Teams can use AI to draft content without losing quality if they treat the AI as a fast first-draft assistant inside an editorial process, not as the author. The workflow below puts human decisions at the start (the brief and sources) and at the end (fact-check and sign-off), so AI speeds up the middle without deciding what is true or what gets published.
What Google says, and why it shapes the workflow
Google’s guidance on generative AI content says AI can be useful when researching a topic or structuring original content, but anything you publish must still meet its Search Essentials and spam policies. It also warns that using generative AI to produce many pages without adding value for users may violate its spam policy on scaled content abuse. And because models predict likely word sequences rather than retrieve facts, output can contain inaccuracies, so Google advises manually fact-checking and reviewing all AI-generated content. The same review applies to title elements, meta descriptions, structured data and image alt text (Google Search Central). The guidance also suggests considering telling readers how automation was used.
Those three points, adding value, checking facts and reviewing all parts of the page, map directly onto the stages below.
The workflow at a glance
| Stage | Owner | AI role | Gate |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Brief | Editor or strategist | None | Goal, audience and angle agreed |
| 2. Source pack | Subject expert or researcher | Optional summarising | Sources verified by a person |
| 3. Outline | Writer | Suggest structures | Outline approved |
| 4. First draft | Writer with AI | Draft sections from the source pack | Draft marked as unverified |
| 5. Fact-check | Separate checker | None, or flag claims | Every claim traced to a source |
| 6. Edit | Editor | Optional style suggestions | Voice, clarity, originality |
| 7. Final review | Approver | None | Sign-off and risk check |
| 8. Publish and monitor | Content owner | None | Review date set |
Stage 1: Write a brief a human owns
Before opening any AI tool, write down:
- The reader and their question.
- The purpose: what should the reader do or understand?
- The angle: what do you know or offer that other pages do not?
- Must-include facts, and things to avoid.
- Tone and length.
AI cannot supply the angle you do not have. If the brief is vague, the draft will be generic. This is also where website content strategy comes before design: decide what the page is for first.
Stage 2: Build a source pack
Collect the material the draft must rest on: official documents, your own policies, product specifications, approved data, and interviews with your team. Give the AI this pack and instruct it to use only that material, and to say when it cannot answer from it. Never let it supply statistics, quotes, legal statements or prices from its own memory.
Stage 3 and 4: Outline, then draft in sections
Draft one section at a time rather than a whole article at once. It is easier to review and to stop the model drifting. Mark every AI-assisted section as unverified until it passes the gates. Ask the model to list the factual claims it made, which gives your checker a head start.
Stage 5: Fact-check as a separate step
The person who checks should not be the person who prompted. For each claim, find the source, confirm it says what the text says, and record the link. Pay special attention to:
- Numbers, dates and named organisations.
- Anything about law, health, money or safety.
- Product claims: Australian Consumer Law prohibits misleading or deceptive conduct, so claims about your own offering need evidence. This is general information, not legal advice.
- Links, which may be invented or outdated.
- Title tags, meta descriptions and alt text, which Google says need the same review.
Remove any claim you cannot source, rather than softening it.
Stage 6: Edit for value and voice
Editors should ask:
- Does this teach the reader something specific?
- Is there a concrete step, example or decision aid?
- Does it sound like us, and is it free of filler and repetition?
- Would a real expert in the field find it accurate and useful?
Cut sections that exist only to pad length. Scaled, low-value content is a quality and reputational risk, and hidden costs of AI content production such as review and rework often exceed the drafting savings when this stage is skipped.
Stage 7: Final approval and risk check
A named approver confirms:
- Facts are checked and sources recorded.
- No private, confidential or personal information appears.
- Images, quotes and third-party material are cleared.
- Disclosure of AI use is handled according to your policy.
- Accessibility basics are met: headings, alt text and plain language.
Stage 8: Publish, monitor and refresh
Record the publish date, the approver and a review date. Watch for reader feedback and corrections, and update the page when facts change.
What not to delegate to AI
- Choosing what you stand for or what claims you make.
- Inventing quotes, case studies or testimonials.
- Final sign-off.
- Legal, medical or financial advice.
- Anything involving confidential data in a public tool.
Risk management for the team
The US National Institute of Standards and Technology describes its voluntary AI Risk Management Framework as helping organisations build trustworthiness into how AI systems are designed, used and evaluated (NIST). A small team does not need the full framework, but a one-page policy is worthwhile: approved tools, what data may be entered, which content types need extra review, and who signs off. Pair it with the human-in-the-loop principles so everyone knows where people must stay in charge.
A quick checklist
- Brief written and angle stated.
- Source pack assembled and verified.
- AI instructed to use only the source pack.
- Draft built in sections and marked unverified.
- Separate fact-check with sources recorded.
- Edit for value, voice and originality.
- Named approver signs off.
- Review date set.
Where Radiance Impact fits
Radiance Impact’s Technology division builds websites and workflow automation, and can help design editorial workflows with sensible review points. See Digital Technology and AI Solutions or contact us.
Sources
- Using generative AI content on your website, Google Search Central
- AI Risk Management Framework, NIST
