How Digital News Teams Review Vertical and Square Cuts Alongside Broadcast Versions

Digital news teams are now cutting three or four versions of every story by default: the 16:9 broadcast package, the 9:16 vertical for social platforms, the 1:1 square for some distribution channels, and sometimes a shorter horizontal cut for digital pre-roll. Reviewing vertical and square cuts alongside broadcast versions sounds like a workflow detail, but it is actually a significant organizational challenge that most newsrooms are not set up to handle cleanly.

The broadcast version goes through the standard package review with the senior producer and standards desk. The digital versions are supposed to go through a parallel review with the digital team. In practice, the digital review gets rushed, skipped, or happens informally over Slack because nobody has built a proper system for it. The result is social posts going out with frames that look fine in 16:9 but crop badly in 9:16, or vertical cuts that passed informal Slack review but never got compliance sign-off.

Here is how to build a review system that handles all formats properly.

The Multi-Format Review Problem

The fundamental issue is that broadcast review workflows were designed for one format: the 16:9 package. Everything else was an afterthought. When digital distribution became as important as linear broadcast, nobody rebuilt the review workflow to include it. So digital versions end up reviewed differently, by different people, on different timelines, with different standards.

This creates three categories of risk:

1. Format-specific errors that only appear in the cropped version: a lower-third that gets cut off in 9:16, a graphic element that disappears in the 1:1 frame, a subject framed at the edge of the wide shot that lands awkwardly in the vertical crop.
2. Standards gaps where the broadcast version gets full compliance review but the vertical cut goes out on social with less scrutiny and includes content that would not have passed the compliance check.
3. Version confusion where the wrong format gets linked to the wrong distribution channel because nobody has a clear record of which version was approved for which platform.

All three of these are process problems, not quality problems. The editorial team knows what good looks like. The process is not giving them the tools to apply that standard across formats.

Build One Project With Versions Per Format

The cleanest solution is to treat each story as one project with multiple format versions, rather than treating each format as a separate deliverable. When all formats live under one project, the review record is unified and the approval status is visible across all formats simultaneously.

PlayPause's version stacking lets you upload the broadcast version, the vertical, and the square as separate named versions under one project. Reviewers can switch between versions in the same environment. A reviewer checking the vertical cut can immediately compare it against the broadcast version to confirm that any compliance changes made in the broadcast cut are reflected in the vertical.

This also means that when a note is addressed in the broadcast cut, the digital editor can verify whether the same note applies to the vertical without asking for the note to be repeated. They look at the same comment thread, tied to the same project.

Assigning Format-Specific Reviewers

Not every reviewer needs to review every format. The compliance desk needs to review the broadcast version and should review the digital versions for any compliance-sensitive elements. The digital team leads review the vertical and square cuts for platform-specific presentation. The senior producer signs off on all formats before any version is distributed.

Build this into the review workflow explicitly:

This table tells every reviewer exactly what their responsibility is. It prevents both gaps (nobody reviewing the vertical's compliance elements) and overlap (compliance desk spending full review time on every format).

Format-Specific Checks to Include

Every format needs both general review and format-specific checks. The general review covers the same editorial and compliance standards as the broadcast version. The format-specific checks address issues that only matter in each format.

For 9:16 vertical cuts:

• Subject framing at the top and bottom of the frame, not at the edges of the original wide shot
• Lower-thirds positioned within the safe zone for vertical display
• Text graphics large enough to read on a mobile screen
• Safe areas for platform UI elements at the top and bottom

For 1:1 square cuts:

• Action centered in the square frame
• No critical information cut off at left or right edges
• Text graphics legible at smaller display sizes

• Broadcast: full compliance and editorial review
• Vertical: frame cropping, lower-third safe zones, mobile text legibility
• Square: center framing, edge clipping, text at small size
• All formats: standards compliance elements checked
• Senior producer signs off all versions before distribution

Speed: How to Review Three Formats Without Tripling the Time

The fear with multi-format review is that it triples the review time. It does not have to. If the review is well-structured, the digital formats add perhaps 20 percent to the total review time because most of the editorial and compliance review happens once on the broadcast version.

The key is a clear rule: digital format reviews focus on format-specific presentation issues only, not editorial content re-review. The content was reviewed once on the broadcast version. The digital formats get a targeted check for presentation issues in their specific frame.

With PlayPause's frame-accurate comment system, a reviewer checking the vertical cut can drop a comment at the exact frame where the lower-third crops badly, without having to write a timecode and a description in a separate document. That specific, targeted feedback takes three minutes per format rather than thirty.

Managing Distribution After Sign-Off

After all formats are approved, the distribution risk is sending the wrong version to the wrong channel. The vertical cut goes to broadcast by accident. The broadcast version gets posted vertically to Instagram.

PlayPause's approval lock means that once a version is signed off, the approval record is tied to that specific version. When you export the vertical cut for distribution, you are working from the specific version that was approved, not hunting through a folder trying to remember which file was final.

For newsrooms that distribute to multiple platforms with automated publishing, connecting the approved version directly to the publishing workflow removes the human error layer entirely.

For related reading on managing multi-format news content, see how assignment editors approve field packages from multiple bureaus in one rundown and managing rundown changes and video package updates in the same review session.

Digital news teams handling multiple formats per story need a tool built for version management, not a tool designed for single-format review. PlayPause is $19 per workspace for the Agency plan, with no per-reviewer charges for digital leads, senior producers, or compliance reviewers. Start free and get your multi-format review process organized today.