Find and produce responsive records when requests arrive.
When a request names social media, the search should not depend on screenshots, memory or asking every account owner what they posted. Brolly keeps your connected accounts in one searchable archive, so information-access officers find responsive records with their comments, edits and context, then review and produce on their own terms.
30-day free trial · no credit card · unlimited accounts and users
What this team is accountable for.
When a request names your organisation’s social media, four responsibilities land on the information-access team.
Intake and scoping
Read the request, clarify it with the applicant where the legislation allows, and translate it into something searchable: a date window, the accounts involved and the topics named.
Search across teams and channels
Responsive records live wherever the organisation posts, across departments, account owners and platforms. The officer has to find them without knowing in advance which channel holds what.
Review with counsel
Work through the candidate set with legal: what is within scope, what is exempt, what needs redaction. These judgments belong to the officer and counsel, not to any tool.
Production on the statutory clock
Deliver the release within the timeframes your legislation sets, then log what was produced, to whom and when, so the office can answer for the response later.
Where the current process breaks.
Most information-access teams inherit social media as an afterthought: no archive, no search, and a request already on the clock.
Asking comms to rebuild threads
Without an archive, finding records means asking the communications team to remember what was posted, when, and what people said back. Recollection is not a record.
Deleted posts discovered late
A post removed months ago can still be within scope. Discovering mid-response that content is gone from the platform leaves the officer explaining an absence instead of reviewing a record.
Screenshots without metadata
A screenshot has no timestamps beyond what is visible, no capture history and no checksums. It shows a page, not a record, and it invites the questions it cannot answer.
Per-platform searching
Native platform tools each search one account, one platform, one way. A request that spans channels turns into a separate hunt on every platform, repeated for every keyword.
A better operating workflow.
One archive of your connected accounts, searched the way requests are written, reviewed in context and exported for scrutiny.
Search the archive the way the request is worded.
Requests arrive as dates, topics and account names. Search the same way: set the date range, pick the channels and authors, then narrow by keyword until the candidate set matches the scope of the request. No per-platform hunting, no asking around.
- Date-range filters that match the request window
- Channel and author filters across your connected accounts
- Keyword search across posts, comments and replies
Review posts with their comments, edits and deletions.
A post on its own is half the story. Brolly keeps supported posts together with their comments and replies, and keeps captured edits and deletions from connected accounts with timestamps, so you and counsel review the conversation the applicant asked about, including versions that no longer appear on the platform.
- Conversation context kept with every captured record
- Captured edits and deletions included, with timestamps
- Review before release: scope calls made on whole records
Export a package built for scrutiny.
Export the responsive set in PDF, CSV, HTML or JSON with its available metadata, digital checksums and an audit history of the export itself, designed to support evidentiary review. Exemption, redaction and release decisions stay where they belong: with the officer and counsel.
- PDF, CSV, HTML and JSON export formats
- Digital checksums on exports; metadata and audit history on records
- Your decisions preserved: Brolly never decides what gets released
Relevant solutions.
The role connects to two solutions and to the legislation of your jurisdiction.
FOI & RTI requests
The response workflow end to end: find the responsive records, review them in context, export a package built for evidentiary review.
See the requests workflowSocial media recordkeeping
Requests are the moment of truth; retention is the everyday obligation. How organisations keep social media records under their schedules, long before anyone asks.
See recordkeepingJurisdiction requirements
Records acts, information-access laws and records authorities vary by jurisdiction. Our government hub covers every Australian jurisdiction and New Zealand.
Open the legislation mapWorking with other teams.
An information-access response is a relay. With a shared archive, each team runs its own leg without borrowing anyone else’s memory.
Comms confirms context
The communications team knows why a post was written and what it was responding to. With the record already captured, they confirm context instead of reconstructing threads from recollection.
Counsel clears the release
Legal reviews the candidate set with comments, captured edits and deletions in front of them, and makes the exemption and redaction calls your legislation assigns to your office.
IT stays out of the critical path
Accounts are connected once. When a request lands there is no server pull, no ticket queue and no engineer between the officer and the search.
Asked by information-access officers on the clock.
Do deleted posts fall within scope of a request?
How fast can we search when a request arrives?
Who decides what is exempt or gets redacted?
Which laws does this workflow cover?
Do we still need screenshots?
Start the next request with a search.
Connect your accounts in minutes, and the next request that names social media begins in the archive instead of a screenshot folder.