A weekly roundup has to move quickly, but speed is not the same as skipping review. The studio needed a repeatable way to assemble source-backed reporting, give an editor practical review formats, and keep draft material separate from the public article collection.
The challenge
The same issue needed to become several useful artifacts without copying content by hand. Reviewers needed a browser preview and a Word document, the author needed a plain-text copy, and publication required a finished HTML page plus an updated homepage feature.
The workflow also needed to surface possible overlap with earlier roundups. That check does not decide whether an angle is acceptable; it gives the editor evidence to make that decision.
Constraints
- The site is static and publishes without a content management system.
- One structured issue file has to remain the source for titles, dates, summaries, and sources.
- Draft output must remain visibly distinct from the published article collection.
- Automation can prepare artifacts, but a person must approve publication.
The approach
- Structure the issue. Each roundup begins with a single issue definition for its metadata, editorial framing, sections, and source links.
- Generate review artifacts together. The generator creates text, HTML, and Word versions alongside a duplicate-risk report for editorial review.
- Review the content, not just the rendering. An editor checks claims, links, repeated angles, title treatment, and the distinction between source reporting and studio interpretation.
- Publish deliberately. After approval, the publishing step moves the reviewed HTML into the public article collection and refreshes the homepage roundup card.
What was built
The repository now contains a concrete path from structured input to reviewed output:
- issue definitions for repeatable metadata and section structure;
- a generator for plain-text, browser, Word, and duplicate-risk review artifacts;
- a dedicated review area that keeps editorial work separate from public articles; and
- a publishing step that creates the public article and updates its homepage entry.
The visible result is the studio’s weekly roundup. The operational result is a process an editor can inspect at each stage instead of a one-click black box.
What it demonstrates
This implementation shows how lightweight automation can remove format conversion and repeated page assembly while preserving editorial responsibility. It does not demonstrate reduced cycle time or improved readership yet; those outcomes require measurement across multiple issues.
What to measure next
- Time from issue definition to editor-ready artifacts.
- Number and type of changes requested during review.
- Duplicate-risk flags that lead to a changed angle or source set.
- Link, metadata, or rendering defects found after publication.
- Reader engagement with the roundup archive over time.