If AI Can’t See Everything, Where Is It Looking?

Let’s be honest. Everyone has clocked GEO. It is now firmly on board agendas, cropping up in investor conversations and being rammed into agency credentials decks up and down the country. To go with it there are suddenly a surge of “AI experts” ready to guide brands through the new frontier.

The cynic in me could question some of those ‘gurus’ credentials, but I won’t.

What I will say is this: beneath the AI noise, there are serious shifts happening in how content is discovered, trusted and used.

Recent research highlighted in Press Gazette shows that three quarters of major UK news outlets are blocking at least one large language model platform. That is 54 out of 72 major publishers restricting access in some form. Among them are The Daily Mail, the BBC, The i, Metro and Channel 4.

These are not niche publications. They are some of the most powerful media brands in the country. And they are making deliberate, strategic decisions about how AI platforms can access their journalism.

That matters, because if generative engines cannot reliably access certain and all sources, the pool they draw from for information narrows. And that has consequences for brands serious about visibility inside AI driven search.

​​The Visibility Illusion: Why Big Media Doesn’t Guarantee AI Reach

For years, parts of our industry, businesses and some leaders have operated on a simple hierarchy. National headline equals success. BBC appearance equals validation. Broadcast clip equals impact.

There is truth in that. National and broadcast coverage carry weight. They shape perception quickly and deliver viewership few others can match.

But they are not built for depth. Nationals skim the surface of complex sectors. Broadcast is powerful in the moment, yet rarely rediscovered organically months later unless you already know what you are looking for. As well as this business programming is shrinking, not expanding. With Sky Business off air, the landscape is thinner than many realise.

Add in restricted AI access and the equation changes again. If generative platforms cannot freely crawl large parts of national and broadcast content, their influence inside AI environments may not be as dominant as assumed.

Where AI Actually Looks for Authority

This is where trade and vertical publications step forward.

These are the outlets buyers actually read when they need detail, not headlines. They are where regulation is dissected, technology shifts are explained properly and operational realities are debated. They are also the titles national journalists monitor when searching for deeper sector insight.

Computer Weekly’s investigation into the Post Office scandal is a powerful reminder of this. Long before the story broke nationally and years before ITV dramatised it, Computer Weekly was digging, analysing and publishing the details. The trade press shaped the narrative before the mainstream caught up.

In a world where AI systems rely on accessible, structured and authoritative sources, that kind of specialist journalism becomes even more valuable. If large portions of national and broadcast content are restricted, trade titles that remain open and consistently publish in depth reporting may play a disproportionate role in how sectors are represented in generative answers.

This does not mean every trade title is automatically influential. Quality, credibility and reach all still matter.

But when a brand invests in strong, data backed stories and places them in the right vertical environments, the effect compounds. Sector credibility deepens. Traditional search improves. And there is a greater likelihood of being surfaced in AI driven responses.

There is also a responsibility here. Generative platforms reflect the information available to them, if we feed them shallow commentary and recycled opinion, that is what comes back. If we contribute rigorous analysis, evidence and insight, that substance stands a far better chance of being reflected in search outputs.

Garbage in still means garbage out.

If AI Can’t Crawl It, It Can’t Cite It

Across the agency landscape, mergers are accelerating as the big players are bought or absorbed into larger groups. Every deal sparks a fresh new positioning battle, and right now GEO is the prize everyone wants to own or claims to be owning. 

Some would argue, and I am firmly in that camp, that the fundamentals have not shifted as dramatically as the market suggests.

When SEO dominated the conversation, the agencies that delivered sustainable results were not chasing hacks. They focused on quality content, clear structure and relevant storytelling.

The same principle applies now. You can build frameworks, dashboards and proprietary methodologies, but if the story lacks substance, the impact will be short lived.

If the content is strong, useful and intelligently placed, visibility follows. GEO may be a new label, but it rests on the same foundations that have always underpinned effective communications.

National and broadcast media remain critical. They amplify. They validate. They accelerate. But they cannot operate in isolation.

An always on trade and vertical strategy provides depth, credibility and long-term discoverability. It builds the layer of substance that modern search environments reward.

For me the best formula for now at least, is focus on the story, invest in evidence and respect the publications that do the hard work inside your sector.

It worked for SEO. There is every reason to believe it will work for GEO too.