Politemail vs. Broadcast Foundations

An in-depth third-party solution comparison for internal communication professionals

This page shares an unedited comparison of Politemail and Broadcast Foundations generated by ChatGPT using a neutral prompt.

The goal is not to persuade you to choose one platform over another. It’s to help internal communications leaders understand how the two tools differ, what types of organizations each tends to serve well, and whether Broadcast Foundations is worth evaluating alongside Politemail.

We’ve included the full prompt and the complete AI response so you can review the information in context.

Jump to the comparison
Talk it through with us

How to use this comparison

AI-generated comparisons can be useful for understanding positioning and tradeoffs, but they can’t reflect the specific constraints of your organization.

This page is best used to:

Understand where the platforms differ in approach
Identify which differences matter for your environment
Decide whether Cerkl Broadcast is worth considering as part of your evaluation
If you want to talk through how any of this applies to your organization, that's where a conversation can help.

The prompt used to generate
this comparison

Compare Politemail and Broadcast Foundations as internal email solutions.

Assume the reader is an internal communications leader evaluating options for their organization and wants to understand strengths, weaknesses, tradeoffs, and ideal use cases rather than marketing claims. Include areas where each platform may be a better fit depending on organizational context, workforce type, and communication needs.

Include information on pricing, licensing and/or plans as comparison for internal communicators working within a budget.

ChatGPT's Response
(unedited)

Quick positioning

PoliteMail is an Outlook/Microsoft 365-native internal email broadcasting + measurement platform. The center of gravity is “work where communicators already are” (Outlook) plus deeper email engagement reporting and Microsoft ecosystem integrations. (politemail.com)

Broadcast Foundations is a dedicated internal email tool (separate from your inbox UI) aimed at helping comms teams build, target, and measure employee emails with modern workflows, including retargeting, pulse surveys, and acknowledgements. (cerkl.com)

Ease of email creation

PoliteMail

  • Pros: Strong “inside Outlook” authoring model, plus a drag-and-drop builder option (via Beefree/PoliteMail) for responsive HTML, which can be a big deal if your team struggles with Outlook’s native editor quirks. (politemail.com)
  • Tradeoff: Your experience can vary by interface (desktop add-in vs M365/online interface), and it’s still anchored to Microsoft email workflows and constraints. PoliteMail explicitly positions itself as tightly integrated to Microsoft 365/Exchange/Azure AD. (politemail.com)

Broadcast Foundations

  • Pros: A dedicated email builder + template approach (not living inside Outlook), which usually means more standardization across a comms team and less dependence on each sender’s inbox setup. Foundations explicitly includes Email Builder and Email warned/measured workflows as core. (cerkl.com)
  • Tradeoff: If your team is culturally committed to “everything happens in Outlook,” the context switch can feel like friction.

Better fit call:

  • If your comms team insists on staying inside Outlook, PoliteMail tends to win on “lowest workflow disruption.” (politemail.com)
  • If your team wants a purpose-built comms workspace with more consistent process, Foundations tends to win.

Email templates

PoliteMail

  • Supports template building/sharing, including admin controls around template/content sharing with groups. (help.politemail.com)

Broadcast Foundations

  • Includes an email template library and supports structured reuse (templates are explicitly included in Foundations). (cerkl.com)

Practical difference: PoliteMail’s template governance often matters most in larger comms teams operating within Outlook norms; Foundations’ template story matters when you want the comms platform (not Outlook) to be the source of truth.

Pulse surveys

PoliteMail

  • Offers surveys/polls (rating, yes/no/maybe, multiple choice). Notably, PoliteMail states the sender cannot see how each user voted (kept anonymized) even under individual measurement, which may be good for privacy but limiting if you need follow-up by person. (help.politemail.com)

Broadcast Foundations

  • Has a Pulse Survey element in emails and reports results in Insights; responses are aggregated and available for a set period (documentation mentions availability window and one survey per email). (help.cerkl.com)

Better fit call:

  • If you need lightweight sentiment checks and want strong privacy guardrails, PoliteMail’s “no per-person vote visibility” can be a feature, not a bug. (help.politemail.com)
  • If you want pulse surveys integrated into a broader “send, measure, optimize” comms workflow (and you’re fine with aggregate survey results), Foundations fits well. (help.cerkl.com)

Acknowledgements

Broadcast Foundations

  • Has explicit Blast Acknowledgments designed for “confirm you read this” workflows, with reporting in Insights (date acknowledged, etc.). (help.cerkl.com)

PoliteMail

  • PoliteMail supports tracked buttons and “Actionable Email” concepts in Microsoft 365 measurement configuration, but I did not find a clearly documented, first-class “acknowledgement” feature equivalent to Foundations’ acknowledgement workflow in the sources reviewed. PoliteMail can track individual interactions depending on measurement mode, so teams sometimes approximate acknowledgements via tracked CTAs, but that is not the same as a dedicated acknowledgement feature with purpose-built reporting semantics. (help.politemail.com)

Better fit call: If acknowledgements are a must-have (policy, safety, compliance reads), Foundations has the clearer, purpose-built capability. (help.cerkl.com)

Retargeting (resend behavior)

PoliteMail

  • Can resend to non-openers, but PoliteMail notes this can only be done when using Individual Measurement. (help.politemail.com)

Broadcast Foundations

  • Supports retargeting/resends based on engagement behavior (e.g., not opened), with a built-in workflow. (help.cerkl.com)

Tradeoff nuance: PoliteMail’s “measurement mode” concept is a real governance lever (privacy/compliance vs granularity). If your org restricts individual tracking, your retargeting options narrow. (help.politemail.com)

Email analytics

PoliteMail

  • Strong emphasis on detailed engagement analytics, including account-level reporting and measurement modes (Aggregate, Individual, Anonymous), with admin ability to constrain modes. (help.politemail.com)
  • This is especially attractive in heavily Microsoft-centric enterprises where analytics and compliance posture are scrutinized.

Broadcast Foundations

  • Includes email analytics as a core capability; plus Foundations’ broader “Insights” model supports standard comms reporting and is tightly integrated to acknowledgements and pulse surveys. (cerkl.com)

Better fit call:

  • If your biggest pain is “we need more credible measurement inside Microsoft,” PoliteMail is often the sharper tool. (politemail.com)
  • If your pain is “we need an internal comms workflow that includes targeting + retargeting + acknowledgements,” Foundations tends to be more end-to-end. (help.cerkl.com)

Roles, permissioning, governance

PoliteMail

  • Documented user roles (SysAdmin, Admin, Manager, User) with different access levels. (help.politemail.com)

Broadcast Foundations

  • Supports permissions and access controls around audiences/segments and team members (for example, restricted vs global segment access). (help.cerkl.com)

Tradeoff: PoliteMail governance is often framed through Microsoft + measurement mode controls; Foundations governance is framed through comms-workflow controls (who can send to which segments, who can edit what, etc.). (help.politemail.com)

Email throughput limits

Broadcast Foundations

  • Free forever plan with published limits: 5,000 email sends/month, 3 communicator seats, with overage pricing shown ($0.09 per additional email send; $75/month per additional seat). (cerkl.com)
  • This is unusually transparent and useful for budget planning.

PoliteMail

  • Pricing is quote-based and “primarily based on total audience size,” sold annually, includes support; PoliteMail also describes typical communicator licensing ratios (often ~1 communicator per 1,000 employees) and offers additional/unlimited user options. (politemail.com)
  • Some third-party sites publish per-user estimates, but treat those as directional at best (they are not the vendor’s authoritative price list). (ITQlick)

Pricing and budget realities

Broadcast Foundations

  • Budget-friendly for small teams because it is Free. Forever. with clearly defined usage caps and predictable overages. (cerkl.com)
  • If you outgrow the caps (volume or seats), you will likely evaluate Foundations+ (priced by audience size; quote-based). (cerkl.com)

PoliteMail

  • Expect an enterprise procurement motion: annual subscription, quote-based, with options that can include SaaS, BYOC, or on-prem (the latter requiring additional engineering support). (politemail.com)
  • That can be totally fine, but it’s usually not “grab a card and go.”

Ideal use cases

PoliteMail is usually a better fit when…

  • You are Microsoft-first (Exchange/M365) and want an internal broadcast tool that feels native to Outlook workflows. (politemail.com)
  • You need measurement mode controls for privacy/compliance (aggregate vs individual vs anonymous) and want admin-level governance over that choice. (help.politemail.com)
  • You have the budget and appetite for a quote-based annual tool with IT/security involvement. (politemail.com)

Broadcast Foundations is usually a better fit when…

  • You want a purpose-built internal email platform with a comms-team workflow (targeting, insights, retargeting) that is not tied to everyone’s personal inbox setup. (cerkl.com)
  • Acknowledgements are important (read-and-confirm use cases). (help.cerkl.com)
  • You need to start with minimal budget risk: free forever, clear caps, and known overages. (cerkl.com)

The blunt tradeoff

If you believe “internal email is basically a Microsoft problem,” PoliteMail’s deep Microsoft orientation and measurement controls will feel natural. (politemail.com)
If you believe “internal email is a communications operations problem,” Broadcast Foundations’ comms workflow (retargeting, acknowledgements, pulse surveys, segments) tends to map better. (help.cerkl.com)

‍

What this comparison doesn't capture...

No static comparison can fully reflect:
Your audience structure and segmentation needs
Operational complexity that your team can support
The channels that matter most in your organization
How success is measured internally
These factors often determine whether a internal communication software feels empowering or burdensome in practice.

Want to talk
this through?

No pressure. No commitment. Just context.

If you’re evaluating Politemail and considering alternatives, we’re happy to have a conversation about your specific use case and where Broadcast Foundations may or may not make sense.

This is not a sales pitch. It’s a working discussion to help you make a confident decision.

Talk it through with us

When Broadcast may not be the right fit...

Broadcast Foundations may not be the best option for organizations if:

  • Your IT team REQUIRES an Outlook plug-in
  • Your analytics team makes heavy use of Power BI