Review an interview's recorded agreement against the material and uses planned for the final publication. Keep excerpts, attribution choices, images, and promotional uses identifiable rather than treating a general conversation as one unrestricted asset. Resolve unclear scope before using the affected material, and preserve the decision with the manuscript version it covers.
Identify what the interview contributes
List the material you intend to use: direct quotations, paraphrased information, personal anecdotes, photographs, or other supplied items. An interview folder can contain several different contributions whose origins and intended uses are not identical. Give each relevant item a clear reference in the project record.
Separate material supplied by the interviewee from material created during the editorial process. A transcript, an edited excerpt, and a reconstructed scene are different artifacts. Keeping them distinct helps you review both accuracy and the scope of the recorded agreement without assuming that one file represents the entire contribution.
Read the agreement in relation to the actual project
Locate the relevant written record and identify what it says about use, identification, review, and any limits. Preserve the original record rather than relying on a colleague's summary that the interview was "cleared." A short summary can help navigation, but it should point back to the evidence.
Compare the described project with the publication now being prepared. A book may have changed audience, format, title, or purpose since the interview. Do not decide from the age of the agreement alone whether it applies; examine the actual scope and resolve uncertainty through an appropriate review or clarification.
Keep attribution choices connected to the excerpts
Record the agreed name, role description, or anonymity arrangement where one exists. Check how the person will be identified in the body, acknowledgments, captions, and other relevant surfaces. A name removed from a quotation heading may still appear in a nearby photograph credit.
Review indirect identification as an editorial concern when anonymity is part of the plan. A collection of contextual details can reveal more than one label suggests. Keep that issue visible to the responsible reviewer rather than treating a search for the person's name as a complete check.
Distinguish quotation editing from a new use
Track changes made for clarity, length, or organization and compare the final excerpt with the source. Ensure that the editing preserves the intended meaning and does not join separate statements into a claim the person did not make. Keep the source location available for verification.
Then assess where the edited material will appear. A passage in a chapter, an enlarged pull quote, and a promotional extract can create different contexts. Review the recorded scope for those actual uses rather than assuming that approval of one presentation answers every later placement decision.
Resolve gaps before the publication handoff
List any missing records, unclear terms, or proposed uses not yet assessed. Assign a specific next action, such as locating the original agreement, confirming an attribution choice, or obtaining an appropriate review of the unresolved question. Do not mark the material approved merely because the release schedule is approaching.
Keep an alternative editorial path available. The book may be able to omit a quotation, use other supported material, or revise a section while the issue is resolved. Choose an alternative that genuinely removes the dependency rather than disguising the same material through superficial paraphrase.
Verify the final files against the cleared inventory
Compare the manuscript, cover, credits, and planned promotional material with the reviewed inventory. Confirm that withdrawn or changed excerpts have not survived in older exports or alternate layouts. Record the exact final version covered by the publication decision.
Retain the agreement, source references, and decision history with the project. KDP places responsibility for content and rights on the publisher; an organized record supports that responsibility but does not replace assessing the actual use. Revisit the record when a later edition or new publication surface changes what the project does with the interview.
Frequently asked questions
Clear answers for this publishing decision.
Does having a recording settle whether I can publish an excerpt?
A recording documents material, but it does not by itself explain every agreement or intended use. Review the relevant records and the actual publication plan before treating the excerpt as approved.
Should promotional quotations be checked separately?
Yes. Identify the proposed placement and compare it with the recorded scope and the excerpt's context. A short promotional extract can communicate something different from the same words inside a chapter.
What if the contributor requested anonymity?
Keep that arrangement connected to every relevant publication surface and review contextual identification as well as names. Resolve uncertainty with the responsible reviewer before approving the final package.
What must I check, disclose, and verify myself when AI helped produce the book?
Review facts, rights, and source material yourself, record which parts were AI-assisted or AI-generated so you can answer Amazon’s disclosure question accurately, and treat every automated check as a starting point rather than a verdict.
See what the compliance checks cover