The review checklist every sermon-based post needs before export or scheduling

A sermon-based post is ready for export only when a named person can show its source. That person must also explain how the wording relates to the source and produce evidence for every relevant review decision.

Scheduling is a separate decision. Someone must check the exact account, destination version, date, time zone, link, response coverage, and approval.

Publication is separate again. An authorized publisher must accept that exact version, and the team needs a way to record the live result or a provider failure.

Those are three decisions. Do not collapse them into one checkmark.

Start with a traceable sermon source

Freeze the version under review. Give it a post identifier or filename that will not be reused for a different draft. Then record:

• the sermon recording or approved manuscript
• the sermon title and speaker
• the time range or page range for every source-derived claim
• the copy and design version under review
• the intended destination and account
• the people who can approve, hold, export, schedule, and publish it

Automatic captions can help an editor find a passage, but they are not proof of exact wording. YouTube says its automatic captions can misrepresent speech because of pronunciation, accents, dialects, and background noise. Check the recording or the source your church has authorized for quotation review.

Next, assign one wording class to every sermon-derived passage:

Do not put quotation marks around a composite, paraphrase, summary, or new church copy. A caption-cleaned transcript also needs a treatment that does not imply word-for-word speech.

Classification is the first gate, not the last. An exact quote can still be misleading, unlicensed, confidential, unreadable, or unsuitable for publication.

Use one review record for the exact post

The record can live in a document, task, or form. Its format matters less than its ability to answer four questions:

1. Who owns this decision?
2. What evidence did that person inspect?
3. Did the exact version pass, hold, or receive a reasoned not applicable decision?
4. What must change before a hold can be released?

Not applicable needs an owner and reason. A bare checkmark proves none of this.

The sermon-post review gate

One person may own several rows in a small church. Write the person's name beside each role anyway. A role without an owner is a hold.

The rights row needs local judgment. The U.S. Copyright Office says there is no fixed number of words or percentage that automatically makes a use fair. WIPO notes that copyright exceptions vary by country.

Credit and permission are also different questions. When the answer matters and remains unclear, hold the post and ask the rights holder or a qualified adviser in the relevant jurisdiction.

Consent and safeguarding also depend on facts and place. The Church of England's current social-media policy guide recommends consent processes, safeguarding awareness, factual posts, respect for copyright, and senior guidance on sensitive topics.

That is useful church guidance, not a worldwide legal formula. Follow your own church's policy and local requirements.

A checkmark needs evidence behind it

Consider the line Source checked. What did the reviewer check?

A useful source decision might read:

Pass. The source owner checked recording 18:42 to 19:06 against draft v4 on 29 August. The post is a paraphrase. It keeps the sermon's qualification about listening before responding. No quotation marks or speaker attribution appear in the draft.

A weak decision reads:

Checked.

The first note lets another person retrace the judgment. The second transfers trust to an unexplained click.

Evidence does not need to be lengthy. It needs to identify the source, exact version, owner, decision, and relevant result. For a design gate, that may be a destination preview plus a contrast reading. For consent, it may be a record that names the person, approved use, channels, and withdrawal process. For an event, it may be the approved event page and the person responsible for keeping it current.

Stop when the post outruns the evidence

Put the post on hold when any of these conditions appears:

• nobody can classify the wording with confidence
• the words are accurate but the excerpt changes the sermon's meaning or removes a controlling qualification
• the draft joins distant lines and presents them as one quotation
• a testimony, counselling detail, prayer request, allegation, health fact, or other sensitive disclosure appears in the draft
• a child or vulnerable person appears or can be identified without the required safeguarding decision
• consent, dignity, ownership, licence, Scripture terms, or attribution is missing or unclear
• a name, event detail, link, access instruction, or contact route is stale or unsupported
• the final destination preview clips or crowds text
• the alternative text describes an intended image rather than the final pixels and purpose
• the post asks for a response but nobody can monitor, answer, or escalate it through the church's process
• the exact final version lacks an authorized approver
• the account, audience, time zone, destination field, permission, or provider state is unresolved
• the local status and destination state disagree, or nobody can verify the outcome

A hold is a decision, not a failure. Record the owner, reason, and next action. Revise the post, replace the source, ask for permission, escalate the risk, choose another destination, or omit the post.

Keep export, scheduling, and publication authority separate

Export readiness

Export readiness means the copy and static design have passed their source, meaning, fact, rights, care, and accessibility checks for that version. The exported file should match the approved proof.

It does not mean the church has permission to publish on a particular account or date. It does not prove that destination cropping, alternative-text fields, links, mentions, or account permissions are correct.

Scheduling readiness

Scheduling readiness begins with the export-ready version and adds:

• the exact destination account and audience
• a destination preview of copy and media
• current links, mentions, and platform fields
• the date, local time, and time zone
• response coverage and escalation
• approval of that exact destination version
• a clear provider state

A local scheduled label is a workflow state. It is not proof that the provider accepted, delivered, or displayed the post as intended.

Publication authority

The publishing owner makes a separate go or hold decision for the exact destination version. After the action, that person or an assigned operator records whether the destination shows the expected post, copy, crop, link, and alternative text, or whether the provider returned an unresolved or failed state.

One destination can succeed while another fails. A live post can also render differently from its source file. Publication review ends with the destination result, not the button press.

A fictional worked example

This example is fictional. It does not describe a real church, preacher, sermon, or person.

The source owner records two passages from a fictional sermon:

• 18:42: We do not hurry past another person's grief.
• 21:10: We listen before we answer.

The first draft presents both sentences inside one set of quotation marks. Each sentence is accurate, but they come from separate passages. The source owner classifies the draft as a composite and places it on hold.

The editor revises the copy to:

The sermon asked us to listen without hurrying past another person's grief.

That sentence is a paraphrase. The source owner checks both passages and their surrounding context. The doctrine and context owner accepts the meaning. The post uses no quotation marks and does not claim the preacher spoke that exact sentence.

The editor adds this new church copy:

If you would like to speak with someone, use the contact route on our website.

The facts owner verifies the route. The privacy and safeguarding owner checks where the form sends sensitive messages. The response owner is away and no substitute has accepted coverage, so the post remains on hold.

The team now has two honest options. Remove the invitation and approve a post that does not ask for contact, or assign suitable coverage and record the handoff. The calendar slot does not choose between them.

After the response issue is resolved, the design owner checks the final size and contrast. The image-wording owner writes alternative text from the final pixels. The destination owner previews the exact account version. The approval owner accepts that version. Only then do the export operator, scheduler, and publisher make their separate decisions.

This example shows what the gate caught. It does not prove that the gate catches every possible problem.

Hand the post to the next owner without losing context

Use a short handoff record:

If the copy, image, link, destination, or time changes after approval, create a new version and reopen the affected gates. Approval does not follow a draft through material changes by memory.

Where Church Media Kit fits

When usable sermon captions are available, Church Media Kit can help prepare editable static drafts. The current workflow can carry candidate source evidence and review flags, and a person can edit the copy and design before export.

Those records help a reviewer find work that still needs judgment. They do not certify doctrine, source accuracy, context, facts, rights, consent, dignity, privacy, safeguarding, readability, accessibility, response coverage, approval, destination suitability, or delivery. A local flag, file, or workflow state never replaces the named owner.

Compact sermon-post checklist

Copy this into the record for each post. Write the evidence or decision beside every line.

1. Exact post version:
2. Sermon source and time or page range:
3. Wording class:
4. Source, doctrine, and context owner decision:
5. Facts and event evidence:
6. Rights and attribution evidence:
7. Consent and dignity decision:
8. Privacy and safeguarding decision:
9. Final design, crop, readability, and contrast result:
10. Final-pixel alternative text and essential image wording:
11. Response owner, coverage, and escalation route:
12. Exact destination account, audience, preview, link, date, time, and time zone:
13. Approval owner and exact approved version:
14. Export decision and operator:
15. Scheduling decision and operator:
16. Publication decision and authorized publisher:
17. Live result or provider failure:

If a line is not relevant, name the owner who decided that and record why. If a required line has no evidence or owner, hold the post.

Frequently asked questions

Who should review a sermon-based social post?

Someone with authority over the sermon's meaning should own source, doctrine, and context. Other named people must own facts, rights, consent, safeguarding, design, accessibility, response, approval, destination, and publishing as relevant. One person may fill several roles, but every role still needs an explicit owner.

Does pastoral approval cover rights and consent?

Not automatically. A pastor may approve the teaching while another person owns image rights, a testimony permission, privacy, or safeguarding. Record each decision separately unless the church has explicitly assigned all of those duties to the same qualified person.

Can we export a post before every publishing detail is final?

Yes, if the exact static copy and design pass the export gate. Keep the file out of the schedule until destination, account, timing, response, and approval checks pass. Export readiness is not permission to publish.

Is an approved manuscript enough to verify a quote?

Only if the church's source policy treats that manuscript as authoritative for the claim being made. If the post says the preacher spoke the words, check the recording. A delivered sermon may differ from its manuscript.

Does alt text make a quote graphic accessible?

Alt text handles one part of access. W3C advises that informative images need useful text alternatives and recommends avoiding images of text when possible. The reviewer must also check readable type, contrast, plain-language copy, essential wording outside the image, links, and the actual destination treatment. No single field certifies accessibility.

What if the provider still shows a pending or unclear state?

Do not infer success. Keep the outcome unresolved, preserve the exact version and destination, and follow the church's recovery or verification process. A local schedule or publication label does not prove the live result.

Should a question post be held when nobody can monitor replies?

Yes, when the question could invite pastoral need, sensitive disclosure, conflict, or a response the church has promised to handle. Revise the post or assign suitable coverage. Do not create a contact route that the team cannot responsibly own.

Does this checklist make a post compliant or safe?

No. It makes owners, evidence, decisions, and holds visible. It cannot guarantee accuracy, legal compliance, safety, accessibility, pastoral suitability, delivery, or any audience result. Use qualified review and local policy where the risk requires it.

The useful question is not, "Did someone check the post?" Ask, "Who approved this exact version, what evidence did they inspect, and what authority does that decision actually carry?"