Home / Resources / Stopping unapproved AI claims
How to stop AI-generated content making unapproved claims
Arbitr lets you approve your claims, terms and market rules once, then checks that what your people and AI tools publish stays accurate, in every market and language.
The short answer
To stop AI-generated content making unapproved claims, give every AI tool one shared source of approved claims, check each draft against it before publishing, and hold anything that doesn't match for a named reviewer.
This page explains why it happens and the five steps that fix it.
The problem
Why AI makes claims nobody approved
AI writing tools produce fluent text from general training data, not from your legal-approved facts. The risk grows with volume, and with each extra tool.
Each tool can say something different
Marketing's assistant
States a feature you don't have.
The agency's tool
Quotes a number you've retired.
The support copilot
Makes a health claim your regulator doesn't allow.
The website chatbot
Makes an environmental claim your regulator doesn't allow.
The fix
Five steps to stop it
Step 1 is yours. Steps 2 to 5 are where a governance platform does the work.
- 01
List your approved claims in one place.
YouCapabilities, numbers, comparisons and regulated statements (environmental, health, financial, AI disclosure) each with an owner and, where it applies, an end date.
Arbitr runs steps 2 to 5
Cortex
- 02
Give every AI tool the same list.
One governed source that writing tools, agency tools and website assistants all draw from, so they stop contradicting each other.
- 03
Check every draft before it goes out.
Compare the draft with approved claims, terminology and the legal rules for the market it will appear in. A claim that is fine in one country can be banned in another.
EN-US · ClearedDE-DE · Held - 04
Decide what happens to a mismatch.
Auto-correct low-risk fixes, hold anything that needs judgment for a named reviewer, and write down the rule so the decision is repeatable.
- 05
Re-check what's already live.
When a claim changes or expires, find every published page that used it.
In practice
What this looks like in practice
| Step | Manual process | With a governance platform |
|---|---|---|
| Approved claims | Spreadsheet or brand PDF | One governed memory used by every tool |
| Checking drafts | Reviewer reads each piece | Automatic check against claims and market rules |
| Mismatches | Email threads | Corrected, or held for a named owner with the rule shown |
| Other languages | Separate review per language | Translation checked against the source in each language |
| Audit trail | Reconstructed after the fact | Record of what was checked, held, approved and published |
| Live content | Rarely revisited | Flagged when a source fact changes |
A manual process works at small volume. It breaks when AI multiplies the content and the markets.
Arbitr
Where Arbitr fits
Arbitr runs steps 2 to 5. Cortex is the governed memory of approved content; Arbitr checks drafts and live pages against it, holds items for review by your team or its network of expert reviewers, and keeps a full record of who approved what, where, and when. Teams keep writing in the tools they use today.
37,000
Expert reviewers
120+
Languages
Keep reading
Frequently asked questions
Why does AI invent claims about my product?
Because it generates likely text from general data, not from your approved facts, unless you connect it to them.
Can I just add a rule to my prompts?
Prompts help but don't prove anything. A check against your approved claims, with a record, does.
Do I need a person to review everything?
No. Set per content type and market what is corrected automatically and what needs a person.
What about content in other languages?
Rules should be held per market, and translations checked against the source text, so a claim approved in one language isn't altered in another.