How to Write a Press Release Boilerplate

Key takeaways

• A boilerplate is the short 'About' paragraph at the end of a press release: three sentences that say what you do, prove it, and tell readers where to learn more.
• Sentence one says what the business does and who it serves. Sentence two gives one piece of proof. Sentence three gives the website or contact route.
• Good boilerplates are specific, current, and checkable. Bad ones are vague, stuffed with awards and slogans, or out of date.
• Leave out mission statements, award lists, jargon, and claims you cannot support. The boilerplate is a factual sign-off, not a sales pitch.
• Write one approved boilerplate, keep it current, and reuse it unchanged across releases until something in it actually changes.

A press release boilerplate is the short paragraph headed 'About' that sits at the end of a press release, after the main news and before the contact details. In three sentences it tells a reader what the business does, gives one piece of proof that it does it well, and says where to learn more. It is the paragraph a busy journalist reads to decide whether the sender is credible, and the paragraph a reader checks to understand who is behind the news. Getting it right takes a few minutes. Getting it wrong quietly undermines every release it appears in.

This guide stays sharply focused on the boilerplate paragraph itself: the three-sentence formula, sentence by sentence, with good and bad examples, and a clear account of what to leave out. It is not a general guide to writing a whole press release. Every example uses invented, generic businesses, so you can copy the pattern without copying anyone else's words. By the end you will have a boilerplate you can approve once, reuse confidently, and update only when the facts change.

What is a press release boilerplate, and what job does it do?

A boilerplate does one job: it identifies the sender, quickly and credibly, at the moment the reader has finished the news. A journalist who has just read a release needs to know, in seconds, what kind of business sent it, whether it is established enough to take seriously, and where to verify the details. A reader who found the release online needs the same information before deciding whether to click through. The boilerplate answers all three questions in one short paragraph, without making the reader search the business's website for basic facts.

It sits at the end of the release for a reason. The news comes first, because that is what the reader came for. The background comes last, because it supports the news rather than competing with it. Placing background at the top would bury the announcement under company history, which is one of the most common faults in weak releases. The boilerplate's position is part of its discipline: it waits its turn, says its piece briefly, and stops. A reader should be able to read it in under twenty seconds and come away knowing exactly who sent the release.

A boilerplate is also a reusable asset. Unlike the body of a release, which is written fresh each time, the boilerplate stays largely the same from one release to the next, changing only when the underlying facts change: a new location, a new service, a new proof point, or a new website address. That stability is a strength. It means journalists see a consistent description of the business over time, which builds familiarity, and it means the team is not rewriting its own identity under deadline pressure for every announcement. Approve it once, keep it current, and let it do its quiet job.

What is the 3-sentence boilerplate formula?

The formula is deliberately narrow. Three sentences are enough to identify a business and establish credibility, and short enough that nobody skips the paragraph. Longer boilerplates, with four, five, or six sentences, almost always drift into history, mission language, or lists of achievements that belong elsewhere. If your boilerplate needs more than three sentences to explain what you do, the problem is usually that the description is not yet clear enough, not that the paragraph is too short. Tighten the description instead of lengthening the paragraph.

The order of the sentences is part of the formula. Identity comes first, because a reader who does not know what the business does cannot judge the proof that follows. Proof comes second, because a claim about what the business does is stronger with one concrete fact behind it. Direction comes last, because once the reader knows who you are and why you are credible, the natural next step is to learn more, and the website address should be the last thing they read. A boilerplate that starts with a website address, or buries the proof in the middle of a history lesson, makes the reader work harder for information that should be effortless.

The 3-sentence formula

Every strong boilerplate follows this shape, in this order. The order matters: identity first, proof second, direction third.

• Sentence 1, what you do: the business, what it offers, and who it serves, in plain words.
• Sentence 2, the proof: one specific, checkable fact that shows the business is real and established.
• Sentence 3, where to learn more: the website address, and nothing else that competes with it.

How do you write sentence one: what you do?

Sentence one should say, in plain words, what the business is, what it offers, and who it serves. A good test is whether a stranger could repeat it back accurately after one reading. For an invented example, consider a neighbourhood bakery: 'The Corner Bakery is a family-run bakery in the town centre, baking bread, cakes, and pastries fresh each morning for local customers and nearby cafes.' That sentence contains the name, the nature of the business, the offering, and the audience, with no jargon and no superlatives. A reader knows immediately what the business is.

The common fault in sentence one is vagueness dressed as ambition. Phrases such as 'a leading provider of innovative solutions' or 'a dynamic company transforming the industry' say nothing a reader can picture, and they could describe almost any business. If your sentence one could be pasted onto a competitor's release without anyone noticing, it is not doing its job. Replace the abstract words with concrete ones: what is actually made, sold, or done, and for whom. A tutoring service is not 'an education solutions provider'. It is, for example, 'a tutoring service offering one-to-one maths and English lessons to school pupils in the local area, in person and online.' Concrete beats impressive every time, because concrete can be believed.

Keep the geography honest and useful. If the business serves one town, say so. If it serves a region, name the region. If it genuinely serves customers nationally or internationally, say that plainly and do not exaggerate the reach. A reader who discovers that a supposedly national business is a single shop will trust the next release less, while a reader who finds a local business described honestly will trust it more. Sentence one is a statement of identity, and identity stated plainly is the foundation the rest of the boilerplate stands on.

How do you write sentence two: the proof?

Sentence two gives one piece of proof: a single, specific, checkable fact that shows the business is real and established. The proof should be the strongest fact that can be stated briefly and verified, not the longest list of achievements. Good proof includes how long the business has operated, how many people it serves or employs, a concrete milestone it has reached, or a recognisable fact about its work, stated exactly. For the invented bakery, the proof sentence might be: 'Founded in 2012, the bakery now supplies bread daily to twelve local cafes and employs a team of nine bakers.' That sentence can be checked, it contains no hype, and it tells the reader the business is established and trusted locally.

Choose proof that will still be true in a few months. A boilerplate is reused across releases, so a proof point tied to a single week, a one-off event, or a figure that changes constantly will go stale quickly and make the boilerplate look neglected. Prefer durable facts: the founding year, the place, the scale of the operation, or a long-standing relationship. If the proof does change, update the boilerplate everywhere at once, including in any saved templates, so that no release goes out with an old figure. A stale boilerplate is worse than a modest one, because it suggests the business does not check its own public statements.

Never invent proof for sentence two. Do not round a small figure into a grand one, do not describe an estimate as a measured fact, and do not claim a relationship, a client, or an achievement that cannot be supported. A boilerplate appears on the public record, under the business's name, and a false claim in it will be found and remembered. If the business is new and has no long history to cite, say something else that is true and checkable: where it is based, what it offers, who founded it, or what it has already delivered. Honest modesty in a boilerplate earns far more trust than invented scale, and a new business described plainly is a credible business.

How do you write sentence three: where to learn more?

Sentence three is the simplest of the three, and the easiest to get wrong by overcomplicating it. It should give the website address, in a form a reader can type or click, and stop. For example: 'For more information, visit thecornerbakery.example.' That is all it needs to do. The reader who wants to learn more now knows exactly where to go, and the reader who does not will not be burdened with extra directions. A boilerplate is not the place for a list of social media profiles, a phone number, an email address, and a postal address all at once. Those details belong in the contact section of the release, which sits after the boilerplate and is designed for them.

Keep the address current and test it. A boilerplate that points to an old domain, a page that no longer exists, or a website that has moved will frustrate the one reader who was interested enough to click. Before any release goes out, click the link in the boilerplate and confirm it lands on the right page, ideally the homepage or a relevant landing page, not a broken or irrelevant destination. If the business changes its website address, updating the boilerplate is not a minor housekeeping task. It is an urgent fix, because every release already published with the old address cannot easily be corrected.

Do not add a sales message to sentence three. Phrases such as 'visit us today for unbeatable deals' or 'discover why thousands choose us' turn a factual sign-off into an advertisement, and they weaken the credibility the first two sentences built. The boilerplate's tone should be calm, factual, and brief throughout. A reader who has just read a news announcement does not need to be sold to in the final paragraph. They need a door to walk through if they want more, and sentence three is that door. Keep it open, keep it clear, and leave the selling to the news itself.

What do good and bad boilerplates look like side by side?

Read each pair aloud and the difference is immediate. The good versions sound like a real business describing itself to a stranger. The bad versions sound like a business describing itself to a mirror, using words that flatter the writer but inform nobody. That is the test to apply to your own boilerplate: read it aloud, and ask whether a stranger would learn anything concrete from it. If the answer is no, the boilerplate is not yet doing its job, however polished it sounds.

Fixing a bad boilerplate is usually a matter of subtraction and specification, not of adding more words. Remove the adjectives that claim excellence, remove the mission language, and replace each vague phrase with the concrete fact it was standing in for. 'Leading provider' becomes the actual offering and audience. 'Countless customers' becomes the real number, or is removed. 'Transforming the industry' becomes the founding fact or the scale of the work. Each replacement makes the paragraph shorter and more believable at the same time, which is the direction every boilerplate edit should move in. A boilerplate that gets shorter and more specific with each edit is being improved. A boilerplate that gets longer and more abstract is being damaged, however well intentioned the additions are.

Example one: a neighbourhood bakery (invented)

The good version says what the business does, proves it with a checkable fact, and gives a link. The bad version says nothing specific, claims awards without naming them, and ends with a sales shout.

• Good: 'The Corner Bakery is a family-run bakery in the town centre, baking bread, cakes, and pastries fresh each morning for local customers and nearby cafes. Founded in 2012, the bakery now supplies bread daily to twelve local cafes and employs a team of nine bakers. For more information, visit thecornerbakery.example.'
• Bad: 'The Corner Bakery is a leading provider of innovative baked solutions, transforming the bakery experience with passion, excellence, and a commitment to quality. Winner of many awards and loved by countless customers, we strive to be the best in everything we do. Visit us today!'

Example two: a tutoring service (invented)

The good version is concrete about the offering, the founders, and the scale. The bad version is a mission statement with no facts a reader can check.

• Good: 'Harbour Tutoring offers one-to-one maths and English lessons to school pupils in the local area, in person and online. Started by two former teachers in 2019, the service now works with forty families each term. For more information, visit harbourtutoring.example.'
• Bad: 'Harbour Tutoring is on a mission to revolutionise education and unlock every child's potential through cutting-edge, world-class learning experiences. Our dedicated team of experts is passionate about excellence, innovation, and making a difference. Contact us now to transform your child's future!'

What should you leave out of a boilerplate?

Everything on this list has the same fault: it asks the boilerplate to do a job it was not designed for. A mission statement asks it to inspire, an award list asks it to impress, a slogan asks it to sell, and a history asks it to narrate. The boilerplate's job is narrower and more valuable than any of those: to identify the sender and establish credibility in three sentences. Protecting that narrow job, by leaving out everything that dilutes it, is what makes the paragraph work.

The hardest item to leave out is usually the award list, because awards feel like proof. A single, named, verifiable award can sometimes belong in the proof sentence, if it is genuinely the strongest checkable fact available and it is stated precisely. A vague claim to be award-winning, or a list of several awards, almost never belongs. It invites the reader to ask which awards, from whom, and when, and a boilerplate has no room to answer. If an award matters to the story, it belongs in the body of the release, where there is space to name it properly. The boilerplate should stay clean, factual, and brief, so that it can be reused without carrying yesterday's honours into every future announcement.

When in doubt about any sentence, phrase, or claim, apply a simple deletion test: if removing it leaves the reader knowing just as much about who sent the release, remove it. A boilerplate improved by deletion is a boilerplate doing its job. A boilerplate that grows with every release, accumulating new claims and new phrases, is a paragraph losing its discipline, and it will eventually become the vague, boastful block that readers skip. Keep it short, keep it true, and keep it current, and it will serve every release it appears in.

Seven things to leave out

• Mission statements and vision statements: they describe aspirations, not identity, and they belong on an about page, not in a release sign-off.
• Award lists: an unnamed 'award-winning' claim cannot be checked, and a list of awards turns a three-sentence paragraph into a trophy shelf.
• Slogans and taglines: a slogan is advertising language, and it weakens the factual tone a boilerplate needs.
• Jargon and superlatives: 'innovative', 'cutting-edge', 'world-class', and 'revolutionary' say nothing specific and should be deleted.
• Company history: the founding year may belong in the proof sentence, but a potted history of every stage of growth does not.
• Claims you cannot support: uncheckable figures, unnamed clients, and exaggerated reach will be found and will cost trust.
• Multiple contact routes: one website address in sentence three is enough; phone, email, and social profiles belong in the contact section.

How do you adapt one boilerplate, and check it before every release?

The answer is that you usually should not adapt it. One approved boilerplate, reused unchanged, is the goal, because consistency builds familiarity and saves time. A journalist who reads three releases from the same business over a year should see the same clear description each time, with only the news changing. That consistency signals an organised business with a settled identity. Rewriting the boilerplate for every release, by contrast, suggests an identity that is still being negotiated, and it introduces errors, as each rewrite risks a new typo, an old figure, or a changed website address slipping in.

There are two legitimate reasons to change a boilerplate. The first is a change in the facts: the business moved, added a service, reached a new proof point, or changed its website. Update the relevant sentence, approve the new version, and replace the old version in every template and saved draft at the same time, so no future release carries the outdated text. The second is a genuinely different audience for a genuinely different kind of release, such as a specialist trade release where the audience needs a technical description rather than a general one. Even then, keep the change minimal: adjust the wording of sentence one to speak to that audience, keep the proof and the link the same, and do not create a second, competing identity for the business.

Keep the approved boilerplate in one place where everyone who writes releases can find it: a shared document, a template, or the notes for the distribution account. Name it clearly, date the last update, and note who approved it. When a new release is drafted, the boilerplate should be pasted in, not retyped or rewritten from memory. That single habit prevents most boilerplate errors, from stale figures to broken links, and it frees the writer to focus on the news, which is where original writing is actually needed. A boilerplate is infrastructure, not prose to be freshly composed each time. Treat it as infrastructure, maintain it as infrastructure, and it will quietly support every announcement you send.

Run this check as the last step before submission, not as an afterthought during drafting. Facts in a boilerplate go stale silently: a team grows, a location closes, a service is added, and the paragraph that described the business six months ago quietly becomes inaccurate. A two-minute check catches that drift before it reaches the public record. It also catches the most embarrassing boilerplate error of all, a website link that no longer works, which is a small fault that signals carelessness to exactly the readers whose trust matters most.

If the check finds a change, update the master copy first, then paste the updated version into the release. Never fix a boilerplate only inside one release and leave the master copy outdated, or the next release will carry the old error again. That discipline, update the source, then use the source, is what keeps a boilerplate reliable over years of releases. A boilerplate that is checked briefly before every release, and updated properly when the facts change, will never be the weak point of an announcement. It will be the quiet, credible signature at the end of it, which is exactly what it was designed to be.

The boilerplate check, before every release

• Read it aloud: does a stranger learn what the business does, one proof point, and where to learn more?
• Check every fact: founding year, numbers, places, and names are all current and correct.
• Click the link: does the website address work, and does it land on the right page?
• Count the sentences: is it three, and does each one do only its own job?
• Delete test: does removing any phrase leave the reader knowing just as much? If so, remove it.
• Compare with the last release: is this the same approved text, or has it drifted?

Need help writing a boilerplate that works?

If your boilerplate still reads as vague, boastful, or out of date after applying the three-sentence formula, the fastest fix is a fresh draft from someone who can see the business as a stranger would. Write sentence one from the customer's point of view, choose the single strongest checkable proof for sentence two, and end with the one link that matters, then read the result aloud and delete anything a stranger would not need.

PressFudge offers professional press release writing as a $99 add-on service, and a clear, credible boilerplate is part of every well-written release. Learn more and start an order on the press release writing page at pressfudge.com/order/pr-writing, and review the distribution packages and prices on the PressFudge pricing page at pressfudge.com/pricing. A three-sentence paragraph, written well, will serve every release you send, and it is worth getting right.