How QuoteWorthy protects journalists from irrelevant pitches

We are on the journalist's side

If you post call-outs on HARO, Qwoted, SourceBottle, or Source of Sources, you already know the problem: one good query can trigger a flood of pitches, and too many of them are off-topic, out of scope, or clearly written by a bot that never read your request.

QuoteWorthy helps experts respond to your call-outs, so it is fair to ask whose side we are on. The answer is: yours as much as theirs. A pitch only helps our user if it actually helps you. So the system is built to surface the few genuinely relevant opportunities and to hold people to the boundaries you set, not to help anyone blast every query in sight.

Here is exactly what our system does, and does not, allow.

Only relevant pitches get encouraged

Every call-out is scored from 0 to 100 against the expert's real, structured profile - their topics, credentials, and proof points. Weak, tangential, or off-topic matches are filtered out and never surface as something worth pitching. We do not reward "spray and pray"; the whole point of the product is to cut the noise down to the handful of requests where the person can genuinely add value.

That means fewer pitches reaching you, and the ones that do are far more likely to be on point.

Your location and eligibility limits are respected

When your call-out restricts who can respond - "UK-based founders only", "must be a licensed therapist", "US teachers only" - QuoteWorthy reads that as a hard boundary, not a suggestion. If the expert plainly does not match, the call-out is filtered out of their queue and its relevance score is capped low, so the system never presents them with a strong-looking match for a request they are not eligible for.

Most call-outs set no such rule, and those are untouched. But when you do set one, we will not nudge the wrong person to pitch you anyway.

"No AI" means no AI

If your call-out asks for human-written responses only, or says you screen replies with an AI detector, QuoteWorthy will not generate a pitch for it - at all. The draft button is disabled, and the call-out is clearly flagged so the expert knows the rule. There is no "generate anyway". If they want to respond, they have to write it themselves, in their own words.

We would rather turn our own core feature off than help someone hand you an AI draft you explicitly asked not to receive.

We never send anything ourselves

QuoteWorthy has no send button. It reads forwarded call-outs, scores them, and prepares a draft for review - nothing leaves the system on its own. Every pitch is written or edited by a real person and sent from their own inbox, to you, deliberately. You are always hearing from a human who chose to reply, not from an automation firing on a schedule.

If a pitch still misses the mark

No tool can control what a person does outside of it. If someone ignores your boundaries, copies text elsewhere, or pitches you against your stated rules, that is their own choice, made outside our guardrails - not something QuoteWorthy generates, encourages, or enables. Inside our system, an out-of-scope or no-AI call-out simply does not get a pitch.

If you ever receive something that does not respect the boundaries you set, we want to know. It helps us keep tightening the guardrails on our side.

Questions?

If you are a journalist or reporter and want to understand how your call-outs are handled, reach out through the help widget on this site. We are happy to walk you through it.