Define the scope of the review
Cannabis-related creative can involve very different businesses, products and intended uses. Start by identifying what the actual material describes and where it is intended to appear. A business identity presentation is different from a statement about a product’s effects. Do not let a broad industry label obscure the details a reviewer needs.
This guide uses U.S. federal FDA and FTC sources to organize questions. It is not legal advice, a state-by-state analysis or approval for a product or channel. Identify the qualified person responsible for the applicable jurisdiction, product category and placement before treating a concept as ready for release.
Keep the statement and its support together
List proposed factual statements in a small review record. Beside each, add the evidence or responsible source, the exact creative version and any conditions or unresolved questions. A note such as “service description confirmed by business owner” has a different role from evidence offered for a product-performance statement. Keep those roles clear.
Ask what the evidence actually supports and whether the words go further. Avoid writing a promising health statement first and looking for something vaguely related afterward. If the support is unclear, remove the proposed assertion from the working version until the responsible reviewer has assessed the issue.
Review intended use with the right person
FDA’s cannabis and cannabis-derived-products Q&A discusses federal product categories, intended use and concerns about unapproved therapeutic claims. Use it to identify questions for qualified review, not to infer that a product is authorized because another product, ingredient or use appears in the document.
Include the relevant copy, imagery and surrounding context in that review. An isolated sentence may not show how the finished material presents an intended use. Do not draft disease-treatment or therapeutic promises as examples for a collaborator to adapt. The useful planning output is a clear question with the actual proposed material attached privately.
Look at the complete impression
The FTC’s Health Products Compliance Guidance discusses express and implied objective claims and the overall impression of advertising. A name, visual comparison or photograph can contribute to that impression. Ask a reviewer to consider the complete concept rather than checking only the headline for particular words.
Do not assume a disclaimer corrects an unsupported impression, or that changing one phrase turns an unreviewed claim into an acceptable one. Record what the qualified reviewer decided and which exact version they reviewed. The FTC document is staff guidance in a U.S. federal context, not a safe harbor or a campaign approval.
Keep the decision tied to the version
After edits, check whether the proposed message or context has changed enough to require another review. Keep approved facts and unresolved claims visibly separate. A record of review questions helps a team coordinate; it does not replace professional assessment, establish platform permission or promise that material complies with every applicable requirement.