Most AI writers spray unsourced drafts you'd never put your name on. Mastheads is the opposite - an autonomous AI newsroom. Brief it once (your niche, voice, CMS) and it researches, drafts under a real byline, fact-checks every claim against sources, illustrates, and publishes to WordPress, WordPress.com or Ghost - or hands you the drafts. Quality gates can hold any article for one-click review; auto-publish is opt-in. 5 languages, EU AI Act compliant, one-click export - you own it all.
No reviews yetBe the first to leave a review for Mastheads
Maker
π
Hey PH π I'm Palash, I built Mastheads.
Every "AI writes 100 articles for $9" tool optimises for volume. I wanted the opposite: an AI newsroom you'd actually put your real name on.
So Mastheads runs a full editorial pipeline - it researches a topic, drafts it in your voice under a real named byline, fact-checks every claim against sources, illustrates it, and publishes to your CMS (WordPress, WordPress.com, or Ghost) - or just hands you the drafts. Independent quality gates can hold any article back for one-click review, and it defaults to review, not auto-publish. Every article ships with an authenticity trace you can open and verify.
I'd genuinely love your honest take on the positioning - is "an AI newsroom you can put your name on" clear, or does it need work? Happy to answer anything.
Report
the opt-in auto-publish feels like the right call here, it treats AI output like a contributor rather than a publisher. nice that fact-checking against sources is baked in instead of bolted on.
Report
Maker
@aziztaninahzdΒ Really glad it reads that way π One nuance I'd add: review-by-default isn't us distrusting the output - it's that it's your name, so you get the wheel by default. Auto-publish runs the identical pipeline: same source-checking, same quality gates that can still pull a piece before it ships. Turning it on isn't lowering the bar, it's the same rigor without clicking each time - the difference is who hits publish, not how carefully the work is done.
And exactly on fact-checking being baked in - bolt it on at the end and you're just polishing confident nonsense. Appreciate the close read. π
the opt-in auto-publish feels like the right call here, it treats AI output like a contributor rather than a publisher. nice that fact-checking against sources is baked in instead of bolted on.
@aziztaninahzdΒ Really glad it reads that way π One nuance I'd add: review-by-default isn't us distrusting the output - it's that it's your name, so you get the wheel by default. Auto-publish runs the identical pipeline: same source-checking, same quality gates that can still pull a piece before it ships. Turning it on isn't lowering the bar, it's the same rigor without clicking each time - the difference is who hits publish, not how carefully the work is done.
And exactly on fact-checking being baked in - bolt it on at the end and you're just polishing confident nonsense. Appreciate the close read. π