Which of the materials listed are subject to prepublication review?

The answer

On the standard exam question, the correct choice is "all of the above." Prepublication review applies to essentially any material you intend to release publicly that could contain — or be derived from — information you learned through your official duties or access. That includes manuscripts, books, theses and dissertations, journal or magazine articles, op-eds, speeches, lectures, briefings, conference papers, resumes that describe classified work, and increasingly blog posts and social-media content.

The governing point is not the format of the material but its content and source. If you had access to classified or otherwise controlled information through your position, current or former, then anything you write for public release that touches on those subjects must be submitted for review before publication. That is why the answer is "all of the above" rather than any single item.

What prepublication review actually checks

Prepublication review is a security screening — not a censorship of opinion. Reviewers check the material for classified information, other protected information (like intelligence sources and methods), and, in some cases, information that would violate a secrecy or non-disclosure agreement. Many current and former government and intelligence-community employees sign agreements (such as SF-312 or agency-specific forms) obligating them to submit covered material before releasing it. The obligation frequently survives after you leave government service.

So the trigger is a combination of two things:

1. You have a review obligation — from a non-disclosure agreement or agency policy tied to your access to classified/controlled information.
2. The material draws on that access — it discusses your official work, agency activities, or information you learned on the job.

What is exempt — and why the distractors mislead

Distractors that name only one category ("only books," "only speeches," "only classified documents") are wrong because they assume format decides the requirement. It does not. Conversely, material is generally not subject to review when it contains no information derived from your official access — for example, a novel or article entirely about unrelated subjects, based only on publicly available or personal knowledge unconnected to your government role. Purely personal writing that never touches your agency work typically falls outside the requirement.

When in doubt, the safe course — and the one the agencies expect — is to submit. Publishing covered material without review can breach your non-disclosure agreement and expose you to loss of clearance, civil liability, and in serious cases criminal penalties.

The practical rule to remember: prepublication review follows the information, not the medium. If public-facing material could contain anything you learned through agency affiliation, it is subject to review — which is why "all of the above" is the answer.