O2O Sourcing uses automation in parts of editorial planning and production. This page explains the role of those tools and the limits placed on them.
Where automation may assist
Automation may help organize a topic brief, propose an outline, prepare a draft, format Markdown, calculate reading time, select a licensed illustrative image and prepare files for publication.
Use of automation does not establish that an article is accurate, original, expert-reviewed or based on first-hand experience.
What automation cannot prove
Generated text is not accepted as a source. An automated system cannot certify that a supplier exists, a factory has a stated capability, an event schedule is current, a regulation applies, a product is safe or a commercial term is suitable for a particular order.
Claims of visits, interviews, tests, measurements and personal experience require real underlying records. Automation must not invent those records or imply that stock imagery is field evidence.
Human responsibility
The named author or editorial desk remains accountable for the published article. Material that readers may act on should be checked against appropriate sources, and higher-risk legal, customs, safety, financial or engineering claims should receive qualified review.
O2O Sourcing is revising its legacy automated workflows to add source capture, substantive duplicate detection and a human approval gate. Until those controls are present, automated output should be treated as a draft rather than publication-ready material.
Disclosure on individual articles
An individual article should include a production note when automation materially shaped its research synthesis, comparison, testing or conclusions and a reader would reasonably want to know how the content was created. Routine spelling, formatting or transcription assistance does not require prominent page-level disclosure.
For the broader source, experience and correction standards, read the editorial policy.