Media coverage that's actually about your work vs. coverage you're mentioned in

Went back through everything I'd been calling "published material about me" and realized about a third of it was really just my name appearing in an article about something else — a conference recap that listed speakers, a company announcement that named me as one of several contributors. Worth being honest with yourself about this distinction before you submit, because a reviewer will notice the difference even if you don't flag it yourself. The test I started using: if you removed every sentence mentioning you, is there still a full article left? If yes, the article isn't about you — it's about something else, and you're mentioned in it. If removing your mentions would leave the article without a subject, that's coverage that's actually about your work. This isn't about the volume of press mentions — it's about whether each piece actually does the work this specific criterion needs. A handful of genuine profile pieces or feature articles focused on your work is stronger evidence than a much longer list of passing mentions, even though the passing-mention list looks more impressive as a bullet count.