Clipping championships for doctors: how to spread your podcast and interviews without breaking medical advertising rules
A doctor with a podcast, interviews and live Q&As has more than enough material for a clipping championship. What changes compared with any other niche is the outside rule: in Brazil, CFM Resolution 2,336/2023 bans promising results and treats any third-party post you repost as your own. Here is how I would set one up for a medical practice.
Clipping championships for doctors: how to spread your podcast and interviews without breaking medical advertising rules
A clipping championship for doctors pays clippers to turn a doctor's podcast, interviews and live sessions into short videos on TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, YouTube and Kwai. On Cut.Pro, creating one is free and the prize is paid in credits (minimum 500) or, for Brazilian organizers, in PIX with a minimum prize of R$ 5,000 plus a 20% platform fee. What sets this niche apart is the outside rule: in Brazil, CFM Resolution 2,336/2023 bans guaranteeing, promising or implying good results, and treats any third-party post you repost as your own.
I will go through the decisions in the order of the form and say what I would pick for a medical practice or clinic. Usual disclosure: I work at Cut.Pro. And another one that matters more here: I am neither a lawyer nor a doctor. Read the resolution and, when in doubt, ask the advertising committee (Codame) of your regional medical council, which exists for exactly that.
Before you open the form: do you have material?
Doctors who communicate well usually have more material than they think: podcast appearances, TV and news interviews, live Q&As, talks for the general public, their own YouTube channel. For a championship to work, I want at least a few hours of talk per week of contest. With less, several clippers cut the same answer and your review queue turns into a pile of duplicates.
One filter I would apply before adding any link: watch the material imagining the worst possible cut. A line like "most patients improve a lot" is honest inside an hour-long conversation. Cut to 20 seconds with an all-caps caption, it becomes a promise. If an episode has many moments like that, leave it out.
What does CFM Resolution 2,336/2023 change for a clipping championship?
This is Brazil's Federal Council of Medicine rule on medical advertising. It was signed on July 13, 2023 and took effect 180 days after publication, in March 2024, replacing Resolution 1,974/2011. It loosened a lot (advertising on your own profiles to build a patient base, selfies, publishing consultation fees), but kept the limits that matter most for clips. The points I would put in the brief:
| What the resolution says | Where | What it means in the championship |
|---|---|---|
| It is forbidden to "guarantee, promise or imply good results of treatment" | Art. 11, XII | A caption or hook that promises a cure or a result gets rejected |
| Sensationalism includes information that causes "panic or fear" and visuals that suggest guaranteed results | Art. 11, para. 2, items "e" and "f" | Alarmist hooks ("this could be killing you") get rejected too |
| Third-party posts reposted by the doctor count as the doctor's own | Art. 8, para. 3 | When you republish a clipper's clip, you answer for it |
| Before and after only as a set with poor outcomes and complications, with no image editing | Art. 14, II, "b" and "f" | Before and after stays out of the library |
| In interviews for a lay audience, the doctor declares conflicts of interest | Art. 10, para. 2 | A clip that drops your conflict disclosure changes what you said |
| The doctor, as an individual, answers for what is published | Art. 3, I | The championship is yours, and so is the responsibility |
An honest note: the resolution was written with the doctor's own profiles and media outlets in mind, not clippers posting on their own accounts, and I do not know how each regional council will read it. I do know the clip carries your face and voice. So my rule is to treat every clip as if it were going out on your profile.
If you practice outside Brazil, your own medical council has its own advertising rules. I am only describing the Brazilian one, because that is where these championships run.
Stage 1: the championship
Name, description, category, banner and logo. For a doctor, two decisions matter more than the rest:
- Invite-only visibility. For a first championship, I would not list it publicly. Invite by email or link a group you or your team picked: editors who have worked with health content, patients who became fans of your content (without exposing who they are), students in the field. Fewer people, fewer rejections.
- A description that doubles as a brief. Write there, in three lines, what is off limits: promising results, fear hooks, before and after, patient images. Anyone who reads it before joining knows the tone.
The full form, field by field, is covered in how to create a clipping championship. Here I only cover what changes for health.
Stage 2: rules designed for health
Library: what goes in and what stays out
The library accepts YouTube videos or channels, Twitch, Kick, Drive files, a brief and a Discord server. Whatever participants clip on Cut.Pro from it is free for them during the championship. The order I would follow:
- Your channel or full episodes on YouTube. Educational talk where you explain symptoms, prevention and when to see a doctor.
- Interviews and appearances on other people's podcasts, only with written permission from the producer, covering clips made by third parties and republishing. The recording belongs to the other show.
- A one-page brief with what is off limits, banned words in captions ("cure", "guaranteed", "100%", "miracle", "the best doctor") and how to write your name and specialty.
And what stays out, no exceptions: patient images, before and after, recorded procedures, any moment where you talk about equipment or technique as if it were exclusive. The resolution bans attributing "privileged capability" to devices and techniques (Art. 11, II and IX). A clip has no room for the context that makes that kind of statement acceptable.
Video requirements: the doctor's face and on-screen text
Each extra requirement costs participants, but two pay for themselves here:
- Person who must appear: you. Upload your face (the platform accepts up to 5 people, each with a face photo). That guarantees the clip is yours, and not a moment from another doctor or a random health video someone found and tagged with your hashtag.
- On-screen text with your name, the word "doctor" and your medical council number, plus your specialist registration if you have one. Article 4 requires these details in medical advertising, and Article 6 says that on social media they belong on the profile's main page. Since the clip goes to the clipper's profile, not yours, requiring the on-screen text is the simple way to avoid relying on interpretation.
If you want a third, use required caption text for something like "Informational content. Not a substitute for a medical consultation." I did not find that wording in the resolution; it is prudence, and it keeps clippers from writing something else in its place.
I would also set a minimum length, around 30 seconds. An 8-second clip of a doctor is almost always a loose line, and loose lines are where promises show up.
Tags
The rule is the same as in any championship: #cutpro is required in all of them, and you add at most 2 hashtags of your own per network, on top of profile mentions with @. On each network, at least one hashtag or profile must be exclusive to your championship. A mention only counts with the @; a plain name does not. A hashtag with your name and "clips" does the job. If a clipper forgets the tag on TikTok, Instagram or Facebook, it can be fixed by editing the description later, with no repost; if they remove the tag, the video leaves the championship.
Which prize model fits a clipping championship for a doctor?
Here I break from my usual advice. For almost every niche I would go with per thousand views. For a doctor, not in the first championship.
The reason is the incentive: whoever earns per view picks the hook that gets the most views, and in health that hook is fear or promise. Both are exactly what the resolution calls sensationalism. The dark side of clipping campaigns explains this in more depth.
| Your goal | Model | Why |
|---|---|---|
| First championship, new crew | Per post with a per-participant video limit | Pays only for clips you approved; nobody earns more for an alarmist hook |
| A crew that already gets the tone | Per thousand views with per-video and per-participant caps | Pays for reach, with the cap holding back the clip that blew up for the wrong reason |
| A community of patients and students who clip | Ranking with a weekly prize, mixed scoring | The recurring prize keeps people active without depending only on views |
If you go per thousand views, use all three controls: minimum views per video, cap per video and cap per participant (required in new per-thousand-views championships). The per-participant cap exists because of our own data: in per-thousand-views championships already closed on Cut.Pro, the top participant took roughly 23% to 87% of the prize, with a median near 45%.
On rates, the most cited market reference is NPR's from May 2026: campaigns paying between $0.50 and $25 per thousand views, depending on who pays and what is promoted. I do not know of a range specific to health.
How do you review clips in a health championship?
Review is where a doctor's championship is won or lost. On Cut.Pro, the organizer approves or rejects each video with a reason (duplicate, inappropriate, suspicious metrics, outside the period, rules violation, unavailable, unrelated), and participants see how long their video has been waiting.
The checklist I would use on every clip:
- Read the caption before pressing play. Promises and alarmism usually live in the text, not in what you said.
- Watch the whole clip and ask: does this sound like a guarantee? If so, reject it as a rules violation and say which line.
- Check the on-screen text with your name and council number.
- See if the clip dropped one of your caveats. "It works for most people, but..." cut before the "but" changes the meaning.
- Reject with a clear reason. Participants can appeal each rejection once, until the championship ends. A vague reason invites an appeal; a clear one gets you a better clip the next day.
Review every day: a stalled queue is the top reason clippers quit.
The republishing license and Article 8
When they sign up, participants accept the rules generated by the platform, which authorize the organizer to republish the clips on their own channels and profiles, including monetized ones, without transferring ownership of the video. It is a bank of clips tested on a real audience.
For a doctor, though, republishing carries the weight of Article 8, paragraph 3: a third-party post you repost becomes yours. In practice, before republishing, review it again as if it were the first time, and rewrite the caption your way. A clip approved in the championship was approved for the clipper's profile; on yours, your standard applies.
Where to start
Pick three or four podcast episodes or interviews where you only explain, with no patient cases. Open the championship to invitees only, require your face and on-screen text with your name and council number, go per post with a per-person limit and review the queue every day. In the second championship, with a crew that gets the tone, test per thousand views with a cap.
For the production side, the post on clipping championships for podcasts shows how to build an episode library, and the one on TikTok Pulse in education and wellness explains why health content is the most policed by platforms. Choosing between prize models is covered in clipping championship prize models.
Sources: CFM Resolution 2,336/2023 (text on the CFM site, in Portuguese) · CFM: the rapporteur explains what is allowed in medical advertising (in Portuguese) · NPR, the clipping economy (May 2026) · Open championships on Cut.Pro
