# Social media audit: findings, priorities and an editable template > Review profiles, content and measurement through a worked case. Use the checklist to turn findings into actions with clear ownership. ## What a social media audit is A social media audit checks whether profiles, posts, measurement and ownership support a brand's objective. Its useful output is an evidence-based diagnosis and a prioritised action list. A monthly report tracks a period. An audit can question the foundations: whether the link works, who retains access or whether a measure answers the business question. The documents complement each other without needing to repeat every table. ## Define the scope before reviewing Choose the accounts, objective and dates. For a local business, the question might be “Can someone understand the offer and book from their phone?” For a B2B company, it might be “Does the content explain the service and help people reach the right contact?” Keep a list of official profiles, links, owners and data sources. Use comparable periods and record exceptions: a new account, paid promotion or a service interruption. Choose a content sample that includes ordinary posts and exceptional results. Looking only at top performers creates a favourable selection. There is no universal number of posts that makes an audit sufficient; document how many you reviewed and what you excluded. ## Start with anything that blocks a customer task Open the profile as a visitor and test its link on mobile. Check the offer, hours and contact details. Then review account ownership and the process for removing access when someone leaves the team. The checklist records verification. It does not generate a quality score or connect to your accounts. Use it to distinguish completed checks from outstanding work. An account can have carefully designed posts and a broken destination. Fixing that link has a more direct relationship to a possible booking than redesigning every cover. ## A case: turning findings into priorities This restaurant is fictional. We reviewed the booking journey, ten recent questions and a sample of posts. The table separates evidence, interpretation and action so a suspicion does not become a stated fact. Four questions about hours suggest a possible difficulty, but ten conversations do not represent every customer. Correcting inaccurate information is worthwhile on its own. To check whether it helps, review new questions after the change. The standout reel warrants investigation into topic, distribution, collaboration and any paid support. The audit does not show that format caused its reach. A later test can provide more evidence. ## Review four layers **Profile and journey.** What the account promises, whether information is current and what someone finds after clicking. Check destinations for old campaigns that remain visible too. **Content.** Which questions posts answer, what evidence they provide and which action they suggest. Check whether a post makes sense without seeing earlier pieces. Use [content pillars](/en/guides/content-pillars-examples/) to group topics. **Measurement.** Which indicators exist, since when and with what definitions. Distinguish missing data from zero. Keep reach, sessions and enquiries separate; they are different units. **Operations.** Who prepares, reviews, approves and fixes the work. Record dependencies. One person may edit a caption but need someone else to fix its destination page. ## A practical rule for ordering actions First address verified errors that block tasks or communicate incorrect information. Next address recurring questions supported by evidence. Reserve ideas about formats and posting frequency for bounded tests. This is an editorial recommendation, not a statistical scoring system. Record expected impact, effort, dependencies and confidence in the evidence for each action. When a check is missing, the action may be “verify the problem” rather than “redesign.” The downloadable template includes the example findings and space for your own. Assign an owner and review date. Avoid writing “improve engagement.” Specify the change and what observation would help evaluate it. ## What to give the team If the audit is part of starting work with a client, complete the [social media client onboarding checklist](/en/guides/social-media-client-onboarding/) to agree access, ownership and approval before publishing. A short summary should explain the main blocker, priority actions and unanswered questions. Attach dated evidence links or screenshots. Remove customer personal information and never distribute credentials inside the document. Buffer offers a structured review of profiles and social presence in its [social media audit reference](https://buffer.com/resources/social-media-audit/). The case and prioritisation method here are our own. Audit duration depends on scope and access to information. ## When to review again Set the date according to the action. A broken link can be checked after it is fixed. A content change needs published pieces and an observation period that supports reviewing the signals. A technical correction need not wait until next month's report. Use the [social media report for clients](/en/guides/social-media-report-template-clients/) to follow up the agreements. Keep unverified items explicitly outstanding. A complete audit also explains where its evidence ends. ## Plan your next post in HeyMark. Keep the idea, review the draft with your team, and see how it performed in the accounts you connected. [Start free](https://app.heymark.ai) · [See how it works](https://heymark.ai/en/#product) ## Developer and agent resources - [HeyMark MCP documentation](https://heymark.ai/en/mcp/) - [llms.txt](https://heymark.ai/llms.txt) - [Full site content for language models](https://heymark.ai/llms-full.txt) - MCP protocol endpoint: `POST https://mcp.heymark.ai` - OAuth protected-resource metadata: [/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource](https://mcp.heymark.ai/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource) - MCP server card: [/server-card](https://mcp.heymark.ai/server-card)