hour

24-Mag•New York, NY

6d•Remote

About The Position

We are sharing a specialised consulting opportunity for experienced Journalist/Writers with strong expertise in journalism, editing, fact-checking, technical writing, content evaluation, and critical analysis to contribute to an advanced AI training and written-content evaluation project. Selected professionals will assess AI-generated writing, compare responses for clarity and accuracy, identify factual or logical weaknesses, and provide concise written rationales grounded in professional editorial judgement. No prior experience in AI is required.

Requirements

Native or near-native written fluency in English
University degree completed at an institution in the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, or New Zealand
Professional background as a journalist, reporter, editor, copy editor, sub-editor, fact-checker, ghostwriter, or published author
Strong experience in technical writing, content evaluation, critical analysis, or editorial review
Demonstrated experience editing or fact-checking work against a style guide or editorial standards
Excellent written communication and editing skills
Strong ability to assess writing for accuracy, clarity, and audience suitability
Exceptional attention to detail and analytical judgement
Comfortable evaluating competing written responses objectively
Able to identify factual, logical, and structural weaknesses in written content
Comfortable working independently in a remote environment

Nice To Haves

Experience with annotation, AI model evaluation, or digital content-review platforms is advantageous but not required

Responsibilities

Evaluate and compare multiple AI-generated responses to writing prompts
Assess clarity, tone, helpfulness, relevance, and adherence to instructions
Determine whether responses address the intended brief effectively
Evaluate writing for audience suitability and communication quality
Apply consistent editorial judgement across repeated review tasks
Identify factual inaccuracies, unsupported claims, and misleading statements
Detect writing that appears persuasive but lacks sufficient support
Review content for internal consistency and logical coherence
Flag errors that could affect reliability or reader understanding
Apply professional fact-checking standards to complex written material
Assess structure, argument quality, precision, and overall effectiveness
Identify weaknesses in reasoning, framing, or evidence
Evaluate whether writing is clear, concise, and appropriately qualified
Apply editorial standards when reviewing tone and message delivery
Distinguish strong writing from polished but substantively weak content
Assign analytical quality scores using project-provided criteria
Produce concise written rationales explaining evaluation decisions
Document strengths, weaknesses, and significant issues clearly
Maintain consistency across scoring and comparative assessments
Record evaluations thoroughly using digital review platforms and project tools
Collaborate asynchronously with project managers and reviewers
Support consistent interpretation of evaluation standards across the project
Work independently while managing assigned deliverables and deadlines
Use digital content-review platforms to complete and document evaluations
Contribute professional editorial judgement to AI training and evaluation workflows