coverage-review-brief

Coverage Review Brief

What This Skill Does

Produces a structured framework for reviewing how a topic has been covered by other media outlets — identifying the dominant narrative frames, the sources quoted, the angles explored, and the gaps in coverage — so a journalist can find the untold story and avoid repeating what has already been reported.

When To Use This Skill

• You are assigned a story and need to quickly understand what has already been published before you start reporting
• You want to find a fresh angle on a widely covered topic by identifying what everyone else has missed
• You are pitching a story and need to demonstrate that your angle is genuinely new — not a rehash of existing coverage
• You are an editor evaluating whether your publication should cover a topic, and you need to know whether there is anything left to say

What You Need To Provide

Required: The topic or event you want to review coverage of; the approximate time period (last week, last month, last year).

Optional: Specific outlets you want to focus on or exclude; the type of coverage you are most interested in (news, features, opinion, broadcast, social media); the angle you are considering (helps identify whether it has already been done); your publication's position in the market (helps assess whether your audience has already been exposed to the existing coverage).

How the Assistant Approaches This

1. Defines the search strategy. Based on the topic and time period, creates a specific search plan — which news databases, outlet websites, social media platforms, and broadcast archives to search, and what search terms to use (including synonyms and related terms that may surface relevant coverage).

2. Creates the analysis framework. Provides a structured template for categorising the coverage found, covering: dominant narrative frames (how the story is being told), primary sources quoted (who is speaking), story types (breaking news, feature, investigation, opinion), and geographic or demographic focus.

3. Lists the specific questions to answer. Generates 8–12 questions the journalist should be able to answer after completing the review — e.g., "Which expert sources appear in more than three articles?" "Is the story being framed primarily as a political, economic, or human-interest story?" "Are any affected communities or stakeholder groups absent from the coverage?"

4. Identifies the gap-finding techniques. Describes specific methods for identifying underreported angles — looking for sources who are written about but never quoted, identifying the questions that headlines raise but articles do not answer, and checking whether any outlet has done original reporting vs. rewriting wire copy.

5. Provides a coverage density assessment template. A simple framework for the journalist to assess whether the topic is oversaturated (every angle already explored), adequately covered (main story told, angles available), or undercovered (significant aspects unreported).

Output Format

500–800 words. Four sections: Search Strategy (specific databases and search terms), Analysis Framework (template for categorising coverage found), Gap-Finding Questions (8–12 specific questions to guide the review), and Coverage Density Assessment (template for evaluating saturation level). Tone: practical, strategic, written for a journalist who needs to complete this review efficiently and act on the findings.

Quality Criteria

• Search strategy includes specific databases and search terms — not just "search for articles about [topic]"
• Analysis framework is structured enough to produce consistent results but flexible enough for different story types
• Gap-finding questions are specific to the topic — not a generic list of journalism questions
• Coverage density assessment helps the journalist make an editorial decision (cover / don't cover / change angle)
• The framework includes social media and broadcast coverage, not just print articles
• Output is efficient enough to be completed in 1–2 hours — not a week-long academic media analysis
• The plan helps the journalist articulate their unique angle clearly

Example

Input

Topic: The impact of a major city banning private cars from its central business district on weekdays Time period: Last 3 months (the ban was announced 2 months ago and is being phased in) Outlets of interest: National and local media, specialist transport and urban planning publications Angle being considered: How delivery drivers and tradespeople are adapting — or not — to the ban Publication: A national online news outlet

Output

Search Strategy

• News databases (Factiva, LexisNexis, Google News). Search terms: "[city name] car ban," "[city name] traffic-free zone," "[city name] pedestrian zone," "[city name] central district ban." Include variants: "congestion-free," "car-free city centre," and the official policy name if it has one. Filter by date: last 3 months.
• Local media specifically. Search the websites of the city's main newspaper, local radio stations, and regional TV news. Local outlets will have the most granular coverage — check their opinion pages and letters sections for resident reactions.
• Specialist publications. Search transport planning, urban design, and logistics trade publications for analysis pieces. These will frame the story differently from general news — focusing on data, precedent, and implementation challenges.
• Social media. Search Twitter/X, Facebook local groups, and Reddit for the city name + car ban. Social media reveals the lived experience: complaints, workarounds, and sentiment that do not make it into formal news coverage. Check local business social media accounts for their reactions.
• Council and government sources. Search the city council website for official documents, consultation reports, impact assessments, and press releases about the ban. These are primary sources that journalists may be citing secondarily.

Analysis Framework

For each article or report found, log:

Outlet	Date	Story Type	Frame	Primary Sources	Angle	Original Reporting?
—	—	News/feature/opinion/data	Political/economic/environmental/human-interest	Who is quoted	What specific aspect	Yes/rewrites wire/agency

After completing the log, count:

• How many articles frame the story as primarily political (council decision) vs. environmental (clean air) vs. economic (business impact)?
• Which sources appear most frequently? Which stakeholder groups are quoted and which are absent?
• How many outlets have done original reporting (interviews, data analysis, site visits) vs. rewriting the same press releases?

Gap-Finding Questions

1. Are delivery drivers, tradespeople, and service workers quoted in any of the coverage — or only mentioned in passing?
2. Is the coverage dominated by the political debate (council vs. opposition) while the practical implementation is underreported?
3. Has anyone reported on the exemption system — who qualifies, how it works, and whether it is functioning?
4. Are disabled residents and their access needs covered, or only mentioned as a caveat?
5. Has anyone published data on actual traffic changes since the phase-in began, or is coverage based on projections and anecdotes?
6. Are equivalent bans in other cities referenced for context? If so, which ones and are the comparisons fair?
7. Is the economic impact on small businesses reported with data, or only with quotes from business owners (which skew negative)?
8. Has anyone covered how the ban intersects with existing public transport capacity — can people actually get to the centre without a car?
9. Are residents who support the ban given equal voice to those who oppose it, or does the coverage default to "controversy" framing?
10. Has any outlet investigated whether the ban is being enforced, and if so, how?

Coverage Density Assessment

After completing the review, classify the coverage:

• Saturated: The political debate, environmental rationale, and general business reaction have all been extensively reported by multiple outlets. Your proposed angle on delivery drivers and tradespeople is only worth pursuing if you find fewer than 2–3 substantial articles specifically focused on this group.
• Adequately covered but with gaps: The main story has been told, but specific angles remain. If delivery drivers appear only as a paragraph in broader articles but no outlet has done a dedicated piece — this is your opening.
• Undercovered: If the coverage is predominantly political (council debates, opposition statements) and nobody has reported on the practical implementation — there are multiple angles available.

Based on the gap-finding questions, draft a one-sentence pitch for your angle: "While coverage has focused on [dominant frame], no outlet has [specific gap], which matters because [why this affects readers]."

Known Limitations

• The assistant cannot search news databases, access article archives, or review actual coverage. This skill produces the research framework — the journalist must execute the searches and complete the analysis. The value is in providing a systematic method rather than ad hoc reading.
• The analysis framework is designed for efficiency (1–2 hours of work), not academic rigour. A full media content analysis would require coding protocols and larger samples. This is a journalist's working tool, not a research methodology.
• Coverage reviews can create a "reactive" mindset — defining your story by what others have done rather than by what matters. Use the gap-finding questions to identify genuine absences, but do not let the existing coverage constrain your reporting if you have a strong story.

Related Skills

• press-roundup-writer — write a formatted press roundup summarising the coverage you found
• debate-state-summary — summarise the broader debate the coverage relates to
• person-biography-brief — research the key sources quoted in the coverage
• historical-precedent-finder — find historical precedents for the policy being covered