Press release distribution advertising rules: test the page

Judge the destination, not just the release file: readers should recognise marketing before they read the main copy. The label, headline, image, byline, call to action and surrounding page combine to shape that impression. This is a practical page test, not legal clearance, and the decision applies only to the version inspected.

What counts as a clear result for this page?

A pass is justified only if the intended audience can identify the item as marketing before reading, while the headline, image, byline and call to action do not leave an unexplained editorial impression. Otherwise, revise the presentation or hold the review; a decision relates to the specific page version examined.

Record the decision and chosen wording in the disclosure policy, tied to the placement reviewed. This shows that approval covered a page-level label on one specific version; it does not establish that another layout or destination uses the same presentation. Keep the reviewer's reason with the outcome.

What should I have ready before reviewing?

Have the exact destination and version ready, along with all the elements shown to readers. Record the page, approved copy version, proposed label, headline, image, byline and call to action, then open the finished placement rather than judging the file alone.

A standalone document cannot show whether the label is visible or how the surrounding presentation affects the impression. Inspect the actual destination, not a draft, brief or earlier version, so the review reflects what the intended audience will encounter on screen.

For content going to several outlets, compare each finished layout using the product comparison. A disclosure can appear in a different position or with less prominence on another page, so an earlier mock-up cannot establish what the current audience will see. Note the destination and version for every review.

Use the route planning template to identify the destination covered by the review. Its flowchart frames the route question, but it cannot stand in for inspection of the page readers will actually see. Keep the destination and copy version together with the eventual review outcome.

What tells me the disclosure is clear?

Check the disclosure before reading the main copy. CAP Code rule 2.1 says marketing communications should be obviously identifiable, while rule 2.3 says advertorials should be clearly identified as advertorials; judge whether the audience can recognise the commercial nature of the item.

Open the actual page and inspect its label and title before using background from the brief. Check that the wording is visible before the first line and clearly belongs to the item. If a reader needs to search, infer meaning from nearby material or scroll to find it, change the placement and test once more.

Possible terms include Advertorial, Paid promotion, Promoted by [advertiser] or This content was paid for by [advertiser]. They are examples to evaluate in context rather than automatic solutions. Select wording that plainly signals marketing status, and save its exact wording instead of simply recording that a label was added.

Make a first-pass record of the page view, the label's exact wording and position, and the reviewer's answer to one test: would the intended audience understand, before reading, that this is marketing? An uncertain answer calls for revision, not a pass based only on the fact that a label exists.

Could the page still look editorial?

Yes. A disclosure cannot be assessed in isolation: the headline, image, byline, surrounding page and call to action all affect the overall impression. Look for anything that could make the item seem like independent reporting even though a label appears somewhere on the page.

For each part of the placement, note what a reader encounters and how it may affect the impression. Include the wording and position of the disclosure. These prompts keep the assessment centred on the complete page rather than assuming that one component is decisive.

An ASA ruling about affiliate stories shows why the setting matters: the stories earned commission through links, counted as marketing communications and needed a clear, prominent identifier such as Ad. Use that example to inform the review, but judge the actual page and its presentation rather than copying a label without checking how it reads there.

When should I check the page again?

Run the test again whenever any part of the disclosure or page changes, because the finding applies only to the reviewed combination. Recheck edits to the label, headline, image, byline or call to action, as well as a new layout or destination, before approving the changed page.

Keep the reviewed page view with the copy version, destination, review date and outcome. An earlier screenshot cannot establish how a revised presentation looks. If another page is submitted, retain its view and note the difference; the record should show the page the reviewer saw, not merely state that a disclosure was checked.

For late edits, use the quality checklist alongside the version-specific review. The team roles can identify who may pause distribution or request a correction if the presentation changes after review. This test concerns commercial identification only; it does not replace assessment of other requirements that may apply to the announcement.

What should I do first?

Start by selecting the final destination and copy version. Open that page, judge the disclosure before the body copy, assess the surrounding presentation, then save a pass, revision or hold with the page view and reasons.