Fact-Check Checklist for AI Video Scripts

An AI script sounds equally sure of a true statement and a fabricated one. That is the whole problem. A confident sentence about a date, a number or a quotation can be wrong without any change in tone, and a short video repeats it to thousands of people in under a minute.

This checklist is a way to catch the mistakes that matter without turning every video into a research project. It assumes you have a finished script in front of you. Kineclip writes its scripts with AI, so the routine applies to every video you publish, whatever tool you use.

Step 1: pull out the checkable claims

Read the script once and underline every sentence that could be shown false. Skip opinions and framing. You are looking for:

• Numbers: amounts, percentages, rankings, measurements.
• Dates and durations.
• Named people, places, companies and products.
• Direct quotations and attributions.
• Causal claims: “X causes Y,” “because of X, Y happened.”
• Superlatives: first, only, largest, never, always.

Step 2: triage by how much damage a mistake does

Step 3: verify against the right kind of source

From strongest to weakest:

1. The primary source. The study itself, the official statistics page, the court document, the company filing, the platform’s own policy page.
2. A reputable secondary source that cites the primary one. A major reference work, a news report that links the original.
3. Two independent secondary sources that agree. Independent means they are not both copying a third.
4. A single secondary source. Acceptable only for low-risk claims.
5. Another AI answer. Not a source. Asking a chatbot whether a chatbot’s claim is true tells you what the model believes, not what is documented.

Step 4: keep a claim log

For a recurring series, a simple log pays for itself because it shows which kinds of errors your niche attracts. Copy this into a spreadsheet:

Video | Claim (as spoken)          | Type      | Source checked        | Result            | Action
------|----------------------------|-----------|-----------------------|-------------------|--------------
1042  | "Founded in 1887"          | date      | company history page  | confirmed         | none
1042  | "Over 3 million customers" | statistic | annual report 2025    | figure is 2.8M    | correct to 2.8M
1042  | "He never gave interviews" | superlative| (none found)         | unverified        | cut

Step 5: narrow, attribute or cut

Weakening a claim does not verify it. “One of the first” is a different claim from “the first”, and it still needs evidence that the thing really was among the first. A narrower or hedged claim is acceptable only when you have evidence for that narrower claim. If you do not, omit it.

What an automated pipeline changes

When a series publishes without you reading each script, the checking has to move upstream. Pick formats and niches where the stakes are low and the claims are durable, avoid scripts built on statistics and quotations, and review a sample regularly. The auto-post versus manual review guide covers where to place the review step, and the pre-publish checklist shows where fact-checking fits in the full review.

It is also worth reading how platforms treat AI-generated content in general; the disclosure guide covers what current rules say about labelling.

Frequently asked questions