“Light review” is how most agencies try to stay competitive.
What if they did this instead?
What clients actually need isn’t a "light review".
They need an INTENTIONAL REVIEW.
Not everything in a text deserves the same attention. Some parts are noise. Some parts decide outcomes.
Intentional review means focusing human effort where language actually does work:
- Persuasion, trust, clarity, risk. Headlines. CTAs. Brand moments. Anything that can change how a message lands.
This is where AI helps.
Not by reviewing for us, but by telling us where to look. Flagging tone shifts. Surfacing intent mismatches. Pointing out the moments that deserve human judgment.
That’s a fundamentally different model than “light review.” This is also where our Translation Smells are heading. As Gabriel put it: bringing the right things to our attention, then intensively editing what matters. That isn’t a light review. That’s intentional review.
Let us know what you think about the term "Light Review."
If AI Writes, Reviews, and Fixes… Who’s the Author.mp4
2 comments
I like the idea of an intentional review. However agencies must realize that AI must be supported by professionals who understand the context. They should not pay ridiculous amounts that are little even for cleaners. We are enthus about the instrument, but we are also part of the "intentional" aspect you mention. We dhould not ne throttled.
“light review“ is a trap. It’s a superficial touch up, diverting translators from the tiny details that can distort or even spin around the meaning of a message. We need to recognze the real value of a linguist’s insight