Run a pre-publish verification pass so a factual mistake doesn't ship because nobody re-checked the draft

Before this piece goes out, run a verification checklist against the draft below. Treat every version-1 fact-check as potentially stale — re-verify against current sources now, not against whatever was true when the draft was first written.

DRAFT TO CHECK
a 900-word blog post citing three industry statistics and two named executives' public statements

WHERE THIS IS PUBLISHING
the company's public blog, which gets cited by trade press

DEADLINE PRESSURE
publishing in 40 minutes, this is the last check before it goes live

CHECKLIST — GO CLAIM BY CLAIM
For every factual claim in the draft (a number, a name, a date, a quote, a status like "currently" or "as of now"), do the following: (1) check whether it's still accurate as of today, not just whether it was accurate when likely written; (2) check whether it's attributed to the right source in the draft, or whether the draft's citation doesn't actually match what that source says; (3) flag any claim stated more strongly in the draft than the underlying source actually supports (a source that says "likely" being reported in the draft as certain); (4) flag any claim that has no clear source at all, even if it reads as common knowledge.

OUTPUT
A numbered list matching the order claims appear in the draft: Claim | Status (Still accurate / Now outdated / Misattributed / Overstated / Unsourced) | What to fix, in one sentence. Only include claims that need a flag — don't pad the list with claims that checked out cleanly, since publishing in 40 minutes, this is the last check before it goes live means the list needs to be scannable, not exhaustive busywork.

End with a single line: publish as-is, publish after fixing the flagged items, or hold — do not soften this into "looks mostly good" if there's a flagged item serious enough to actually delay publication.