"reddit is dead" Should you chase short-term citation trends in AI Search? 🧐
It's been a heavy topic of discussion in my LinkedIn comments over the last few days. Generally, we work with our customers on a North Star of creating useful, tasteful, and deliberate content.
Of course... it's equally as hard for us to ignore the results that we've been able to drive when we notice big changes, in real time, and move fast.
If you're reading comments and posts that say "reddit is dead", the best thing to do is ignore and go about your day. But for those of you who are curious, experiment-driven, and have some spare time (like me) here's what we're seeing & testing internally:
--> With the decline in social, most of the citation share was re-allocated to company websites (what we call owned media)
--> We separate owned media into two types: competitive and non-competitive. Was this content made by a company who sells products and services that the prompt is asking for? Or was it made by a company who sells products and services but that are not relevant to the actual user query?
--> A great example of non-competitive owned media is
@zapier . We work closely with them on AEO, and they make a lot of great and useful content about products that they integrate with (but **don't** compete with).
--> Non-competitive owned media can be a really great, above-ground, and low-cost way to secure mentions that have a similar impact to PR.
--> With the rise in non-competitive owned media, we are seeing a lot of opportunities for our clients to work with vendors that are getting cited for the first time.
We believe that it is far too easy to get tempted into short-term tricks that may do more harm to your brand image than the value they generate from the improved visibility.
But that doesn't always mean that there is no value in finding arbitrage and moving quickly.