Original Research
Part of Digital PR campaign reviews
Measuring the useful life of a research asset
Review a PR research asset’s use, reader relevance and evidence currency to decide whether to maintain, update, archive or correct it.
A research asset remains useful while its finding is accurate at the stated scope, its source version can be checked and it still answers a reader question. Review those conditions over time. Neither a fixed expiry date nor a later mention establishes continuing value.
Define the asset and its limits
Record the release date, underlying data period, intended audience, central finding and known limits. Note what would make a current claim stale: a revised source series, a changed service, a superseded policy, a new market condition or a corrected calculation.
An asset about a past period can remain a sound historical account. It becomes misleading if reused as evidence of today’s position without a fresh check.
Keep versions distinct. A chart revised after an error is not interchangeable with the chart originally supplied. Record when each version was available, which outlets received it and what changed. A download date alone may not identify the underlying figures.
Track use and evidence condition separately
Keep a dated record of three kinds of observation:
- Editorial use:original coverage, later independent references, requests for data or method, and clear reuse. Open an item before classifying it; a search result may be an apparent copy or a passing mention.
- Reader use:relevant visits, questions or enquiries where these can be observed. Such activity does not capture everyone who read the research or establish that the asset caused a later decision.
- Evidence condition:whether the values, definitions, population and limitations still support the way the asset is presented.
Mark the last observed use and the last evidence review separately. A quiet period does not prove that nobody found the asset useful. Renewed traffic to an outdated chart is a reason to inspect it, not a reason to call it current.
Choose what happens next
At each review, read the headline, chart and method note as a new visitor would. Do they identify the measured group and period? Does a newer source change the result or simply offer a later comparison? Could someone mistake the page for a statement about today?
Maintain an accurate asset whose current or historical question remains clear. Update it when new information can be added without obscuring the earlier version. Archive an accurate past asset with its historical status visible. Correct a materially wrong calculation or framing; hold or withdraw the affected claim if a sound correction is not yet available.
The ABC’s online-content guidance recognises that an accurate story may need an update for continuing contextual accuracy. That is the ABC’s editorial guidance, not an expiry rule for research assets.
Record the decision and next review trigger. An asset’s useful life depends on whether its claim can still be used responsibly for its stated question, with its version and limits visible. Continued circulation does not make an outdated claim reliable.
