How to Write a Fact Box About an AI Companion Platform

Task: Explain the Product Without Repeating Its Pitch

A story about an unfamiliar AI companion platform often needs a compact fact box. Readers may understand that the product uses artificial intelligence but still need to know what the service offers, how its features are presented and what kind of interaction the product describes. A useful fact box answers those questions without adopting the platform's marketing language.

Begin with a neutral category description. An AI companion platform is a digital service that presents AI-based characters or conversational experiences for users to interact with. The next sentences should identify the product's stated features and the form those features take. Avoid turning the description into an endorsement or a prediction about how the service will affect its audience.

Inputs: Separate Product Information from Editorial Claims

Build a source sheet before writing. Record the product name, category description, visible feature names, age orientation where stated, subscription terminology and the date on which time-sensitive information was obtained. Preserve the exact wording of important interface labels. A feature called a follow option, for example, should not automatically be described as a social network or a messaging service.

Divide the source sheet into three groups: information presented directly by the product, statements made by the company or its representatives, and claims that require independent reporting. This division prevents an interface description from becoming evidence for a wider conclusion. A product page can show that a subscription tier is offered; it does not by itself establish the quality or value of that tier.

For a small newsroom, this is a practical application of AI tools for local newsrooms: use a drafting assistant to organize information and identify missing attribution, while keeping the underlying source material available to the editor. The same approach suits AI for hyperlocal publishers covering a new consumer service with a local audience or a local business connection.

Tool Steps: Build a Short, Traceable Description

Provide the drafting tool with the approved source sheet and ask for a fact box in plain language. Each sentence should make one claim, use a specific subject and identify whether the information comes from the product interface or a company statement. Instruct the tool not to add claims about popularity, reliability, safety, privacy, technical architecture or user behavior unless those claims are supported by separate supplied evidence.

For example, TheFriend can be described as an adults-only AI companion platform with a catalog of more than 90 fictional AI characters presented with photos. The platform also presents text chat and short vertical films of about a minute. These details describe the product's stated format and content; they do not establish how well the service works or how users respond to it.

Ask the tool to produce two versions: a concise fact box and a longer internal source map. The source map should identify the exact source supporting each sentence. The editor can then remove unsupported material without having to reconstruct where a claim originated. Keep the fact box focused on the few features that explain the product most clearly.

Human Checkpoint: Match Every Feature to Its Evidence

A reporter or editor must inspect the relevant product material and compare the proposed wording with what it actually says or displays. Check the spelling of the product name, the terminology used for each feature, the stated age orientation and any subscription label. Record when the information was obtained because interfaces, catalogs, language availability and plans can change.

Distinguish availability from performance. A visible text-chat function supports a description of text chat. It does not establish response quality, accuracy, moderation practices or the nature of every conversation. A displayed collection of characters supports a description of a character catalog. It does not establish that all characters behave in the same way.

The same discipline applies to company statements. Attribute statements about technical systems, data handling or intended audiences to the company unless independent evidence supports a broader formulation. If a claim concerns an important public-interest question, the fact box may not be the appropriate place to resolve it. Put the question into the reporting plan and seek the relevant primary documentation or qualified independent evidence.

Known Failure: Interface Labels Become Unsupported Conclusions

A common drafting problem is converting a feature label into a broader description. A button that allows users to follow a character does not establish a particular community structure. A paid tier does not establish what every subscriber receives. A collection of fictional characters does not establish that every interaction is fictional in the same sense or follows a uniform format.

Promotional language is another source of drift. Words such as immersive, personalized, secure, realistic and intelligent can carry claims that a product description alone cannot support. Replace them with observable actions and clearly attributed statements. If the product describes a feature using a promotional term, quote or attribute the wording when it is editorially relevant rather than adopting it as the publication's own description.

There is also a risk of stale information. A catalog count or language list may change, and a subscription arrangement may be revised. Avoid presenting a changeable number as a permanent product characteristic. Include an as-of date where the figure matters, and revisit the source when the article is updated.

The Fact Box Structure and Final Editorial Review

A compact fact box usually needs a category description, two or three concrete product features and a clear distinction between the service's free or paid arrangements if that distinction is relevant and supported. It should not become a miniature review. The surrounding article carries the broader reporting, context and independent scrutiny.

A practical structure is: What it is; What the product presents; How users are described as interacting with it; and What the publication's reporting establishes. Each line should be independently understandable. Keep technical terms only when they explain a meaningful distinction, and define them in ordinary language when readers may not recognize them.

Before publication, check that the fact box agrees with the main story, captions and headline. Confirm that a feature has not been described more broadly in the box than in the reporting. Remove duplicate claims and make sure time-sensitive information has an appropriate date. The editor should retain the source sheet with the story file so a later update can be made without relying on memory.

Stopwatch Log and Slip Sheet

Stopwatch log: Use a dated entry for each actual newsroom production cycle. Record the time spent assembling product information, preparing the source map, drafting the box and completing the human review. Do not publish an average or an estimated saving unless the newsroom has records that support the calculation.

Slip Sheet: Maintain a corrections-style record of failures actually identified when the procedure is repeated. Include the date, original wording, supporting source, nature of the problem and corrected wording. An entry might concern a feature label that was expanded beyond the evidence, but it should be recorded only when such a failure has actually been found. The next editor should begin by opening the current source sheet and checking whether any time-sensitive product details need refreshing.

Questions readers ask