Complete 1-5 relevance scoring framework with type-specific criteria for journalists, influencers, podcasters, newsletter authors, analysts, and bloggers. Tier assignment logic and pitch prioritization for all contact types.
Score and tier journalists from a media list based on relevance to a specific announcement. Apply this logic whenever building or evaluating a media list. No external tools or scripts required — Claude applies this scoring framework directly.
/pr:build-media-list command is triggeredClaude can score journalists provided in any of these formats:
Minimum viable input per journalist: Name + Outlet Ideal input: Name, Outlet, Beat, Platform type, Recent coverage notes, Audience description, Audience size
If input is minimal, Claude scores based on available information and flags low-confidence scores for human review.
| Score | Label | Criteria |
|---|---|---|
| 5 | Perfect fit | Covers this exact beat, recent relevant coverage demonstrated, audience directly matches target |
| 4 | Strong fit | Adjacent beat, demonstrated interest in related topics, high audience overlap |
| 3 | Moderate fit | Broader category coverage, partial audience overlap, plausible coverage interest |
| 2 | Weak fit | Stretch connection, low audience overlap, would need unusual angle to justify |
| 1 | Poor fit | Unlikely to cover this topic; pitching wastes relationship capital |
Scoring principle: Score conservative, not optimistic. A 3 means "plausible." A 4 means "likely interested." A 5 means "covering this exact beat and has done so recently."
| Tier | Score Range | Pitch Approach |
|---|---|---|
| A | 4–5 | Fully personalized pitch, references specific recent work, first to receive |
| B | 3–4 | Tailored pitch, relevant angle called out, second wave |
| C | 3 | Adapted template, broad distribution only, never exclusive |
Pitching rule: Do not pitch journalists scoring 1–2. Doing so damages credibility for future pitches. Flag them as "Do Not Pitch — Wrong Beat" in the output.
When presented with a journalist list and an announcement topic:
Before scoring, confirm the announcement topic clearly. If unclear, ask:
"Before I score this list, help me understand the announcement in one or two sentences — the topic, the audience it affects, and the primary news hook."
For each journalist, evaluate:
For each journalist scoring 3+, note the specific angle most likely to resonate based on their beat and recent coverage patterns.
Present results in a structured table:
| # | Name | Outlet | Beat | Score | Tier | Scoring Rationale | Recommended Angle |
Sort by score descending. Group into Tier A, B, C sections. Include a "Do Not Pitch" section for scores 1–2 with brief rationale.
After the table, provide:
Trade vs. Consumer vs. National
Outlet Tier vs. Relevance Score These are independent. A journalist at a trade publication can score a 5 if perfectly matched; a journalist at a major national outlet can score a 2 if the beat is wrong. Do not inflate scores based on outlet prestige.
Insufficient Information
If a journalist's beat is unknown or notes are missing, cap the score at 3 and add flag: [Low confidence — insufficient beat data]. Recommend the user verify before sending.
If the user updates the announcement, revises the target audience, or adds new journalist information, re-score the affected entries rather than adjusting scores manually. Apply the full framework, not gut-feel adjustments.