The quickest way to make a localised clip feel imported is to translate the English one. The words are correct, the grammar is fine, and every native speaker watching knows within three seconds that it was written somewhere else.
So the platform treats output language and target market as two independent settings in every work. A Spanish clip for Mexico and one for Spain should not be the same script.
What the market setting actually changes
Language decides the words available. Market decides which of them a person there would actually use, and what the clip can show at all.
- Wording. The everyday noun for the product category differs across markets that share a language. A translation picks one; a market setting picks the right one.
- Units and formats. Measurements, sizes, and the way quantities are said out loud.
- Scenes. A kitchen in São Paulo does not look like a kitchen in Lisbon. The setting a viewer recognises as ordinary is a market decision, not a language one.
- Delivery. Pace, register, and how direct a recommendation can be before it reads as an ad.
- Rules and disclosure. Content requirements differ per market, and each export carries the synthetic-content notice the destination requires.
Product facts follow the market too
This is the part that causes real damage when it goes wrong. A product listing in one market is not automatically the same product in another: the variant may differ, the pack size may differ, and the claims you are allowed to make may differ.
So a product record carries a reference link — wherever its facts were read from, be it a manufacturer page, a listing in another market, or any page with reliable material — and the market a clip is made for is set per line, not inherited from that link. If the two disagree, the brief wins, because you are the one who has to answer for the claim.
What the platform does not do is manage the storefront link. Which listing an asset gets attached to, and whether it is in stock, belongs to whoever publishes it. Every exported asset states its market, so that person knows which listing they are matching it to.
Reusing a creative direction without reusing the facts
Once a script performs, the obvious next move is to run it in another market. What travels is the structure: the opening angle, the order of the beats, the register. What does not travel is the wording or the facts.
So a localised script is written fresh against that market's product material and saved as its own version, with a pointer back to the script it came from. The lineage stays visible — you can always see which clip came from which script, and which script came from which original — but nothing is shared by reference. Correcting a spec in one market never silently rewrites a clip already delivered in another.
Sign-off is still a person
None of this replaces a native speaker. The workflow we recommend is the boring one: produce the first samples for a market, have someone who lives with the language review them, then run volume. The platform's checks catch length, safe areas, and factual drift. Whether a line sounds like something a person would actually say is a judgement, and it belongs to a human who speaks the language.
What the platform can promise is that each approved clip was written against the selected market instead of assuming the market next door is the same.