Anthropic Asks The AI Industry To Hit The Brakes – Here’s What It Means For SEO & Search Marketers via @sejournal, @gregjarboe

On June 4, 2026, Anthropic published one of the most consequential blog posts in the short history of artificial intelligence. The piece, titled “When AI Builds Itself” and co-authored by Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark and Marina Favaro, lead at the Anthropic Institute, carried a striking message: AI is advancing so fast that humans risk losing meaningful control over it, and the world needs a coordinated mechanism to slow or temporarily pause frontier AI development.

The post went viral. LinkedIn News Editor Andrew Barker covered it and gathered perspectives from more than 20 business and technology leaders. Reactions ranged from alarm to admiration to outright skepticism. For SEO professionals, digital marketers, entrepreneurs, and content creators, the more useful question is: what does this actually change for the tools and practices you use every day?

What Anthropic Is Actually Saying (And What It Isn’t)

Anthropic’s proposal is conditional and collaborative, not a unilateral halt. The company is not shutting down Claude tomorrow. What Clark and Favaro argued is that the industry needs the option to pause, a “brake pedal,” as Clark said in media appearances, including BBC Newsnight and CNN, if and when certain thresholds are crossed.

The specific threshold they’re worried about is recursive self-improvement: the point at which an AI system can autonomously design and train its own successor without meaningful human intervention. They are clear that this hasn’t happened yet and isn’t inevitable, but warn it “could come sooner than most institutions are prepared for.”

The supporting data is sobering. As of May 2026, more than 80% of code merged into Anthropic’s own codebase was written by Claude, not by human engineers. Engineers are shipping roughly eight times as much code per day as they were in 2024. External benchmarks corroborate the trend: METR, an AI evaluation organization, found that the length of tasks AI can handle autonomously has been doubling roughly every seven months.

Any credible pause would require multiple well-resourced AI labs across multiple countries to stop under the same verifiable conditions. Anthropic compared the verification challenge to Cold War nuclear arms control, and acknowledged it would be harder.

The Skeptic’s Case (And Why It Deserves To Be Heard)

LinkedIn and the broader commentariat quickly raised a pointed question: Why is a company on the verge of a trillion-dollar IPO calling for the industry to slow down?

“The Wall Street Journal” noted that critics view Anthropic’s warnings as a marketing play. Analysts at SiliconAngle called the post “more about strategic marketing than any concrete initiative.” Holger Mueller of Constellation Research asked whether Anthropic is simply trying to freeze the competitive landscape at a moment when it already leads in enterprise AI, noting that a pause would lock out new entrants and cement incumbents’ advantages.

The timing is genuinely awkward. Days before this post, Anthropic confidentially filed IPO paperwork that could value it at nearly $1 trillion. Earlier in 2026, it walked back a key commitment in its own Responsible Scaling Policy, the pledge to avoid training more capable models without proven safety measures in place, citing competitive pressure.

These contradictions don’t necessarily invalidate the substance of the warning. The International AI Safety Report 2026, a multi-institution publication, separately documented that leading AI models now perform at or above human expert level across a growing range of professional evaluations, independent of anything Anthropic said. The underlying trajectory is real, whatever the motivation behind the announcement.

What A Slowdown Would Actually Mean For SEO Professionals

A coordinated pause in frontier AI development would reshape the digital marketing landscape in several concrete ways.

The Pace Of AI-Powered Search Evolution Would Slow

Google’s AI Mode, expected to become the default search experience, is built on frontier model capabilities. AI Overviews already appear in roughly 25% of Google searches. The pace at which SEO best practices must evolve is a direct function of how fast the underlying models improve and a pause would buy time. For practitioners who have barely kept pace with the last 18 months of change, that is a relief. For early adopters who have built competitive advantages on the latest tools, it narrows the gap between leaders and followers.

Content Quality Signals Would Become More Durable

One of the most destabilizing aspects of the current moment for SEO professionals is that the rules keep changing faster than strategies can be validated. If model development slowed, the content quality signals that Google and other search engines currently value would remain stable for longer. Practitioners who have invested in genuine expertise, original research, and authoritative human-authored content would benefit most from that stability.

The Human Expertise Premium Would Reassert Itself

If AI capability growth slows, the differentiating factor in content quality shifts back toward human judgment, domain expertise, and creative originality. The content that currently stands out in AI-saturated search results, original reporting, expert analysis, and genuine first-person experience, becomes even more valuable.

3 Things You Should Do Right Now

Whether a coordinated AI pause happens or not, and global coordination among OpenAI, Google DeepMind, xAI, Meta, and Chinese frontier labs is, to put it charitably, uncertain, the underlying dynamics Anthropic describes are real and accelerating. Here’s what to do.

  1. Build your authority on things AI cannot replicate. Original data, proprietary research, genuine expertise, and first-person experience hold their value regardless of what AI generates. Google’s systems are increasingly calibrated to surface content that demonstrates real expertise and lived experience. That is the response to an AI content flood, and it is not going away.
  2. Understand the tools you’re using at a deeper level. Whether you use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, or AI-powered SEO tools, understand not just what they do but how they work and where their limitations lie. Practitioners who fare best through continued AI advancement are those who use these tools as force multipliers for their own judgment, not replacements for it.
  3. Watch the regulatory and policy environment more closely. Anthropic’s proposal is the most prominent recent signal that AI governance is becoming a real business factor, not just an abstract policy debate. The outcome will affect how AI-generated content is treated in search rankings, how AI tools are regulated, and what disclosures will be required. The organizations setting these rules will shape the environment your work exists in.

The Bottom Line

Jack Clark’s framing on BBC Newsnight and CNN that the industry has an accelerator but no brake, is accurate regardless of who says it. Anthropic’s history is genuinely complicated: founded by researchers who left OpenAI over safety concerns, then forced by competitive pressure to walk back its own safety commitments, and now calling for a global pause while preparing for a near-trillion-dollar IPO. That tension is real. It does not make the warning wrong.

For our community, the lesson is not to dismiss the warning because of the messenger’s imperfections. It is to think clearly about what we know, what we don’t know, and how to build practices resilient to a future that is arriving faster than anyone expected. The AI industry has a gas pedal. Whether it gets a brake is one of the most consequential policy questions of our time, and the answer will shape the landscape every SEO professional, marketer, and content creator operates in for years to come.

More Resources:


Featured Image: Master1305/Shutterstock

WebMCP Can Be Used To Hijack AI Agents, Chrome Warns via @sejournal, @martinibuster

Google Chrome is warning developers that WebMCP tools can be used to manipulate and hijack AI agents. New guidance outlines how attackers can manipulate agents operating in a user’s browser, including within their authenticated sessions. Chrome published two guides, one for web developers and another for AI agent developers.

Exploits Are Not Specific To WebMCP

The warning has two disclaimers that explain that the exploits are not specific to WebMCP but are flaws inherent in LLMs and Chrome extensions.

The first disclaimer says the threat is not unique to WebMCP. Chrome explains that AI agents can encounter malicious input from untrusted content even without WebMCP, and that the guide identifies security techniques that are especially relevant when agents use WebMCP:

“While this threat exists without WebMCP, we’ve identified some of the security techniques that are especially relevant for agents that use WebMCP.”

The second disclaimer explains that Chrome extensions with host permissions can manipulate web pages even without WebMCP:

“Extensions can use host permissions to manipulate the page by running custom JavaScript, even without WebMCP.”

Chrome published two related WebMCP security guides:

  1. Agent security considerations for WebMCP, for AI agent developers
  2. and WebMCP tool security, for developers building WebMCP tools

Together, the two guides provide security guidance for prompt injection risks in WebMCP, including risks affecting browser-based AI agents and the tools they use.

Chrome Identifies Two Ways AI Agents Can Be Hijacked

According to Chrome’s agent security guidance, AI agents using WebMCP must defend against two primary attack vectors: malicious manifests and contaminated outputs.

  • Manifest
    A manifest is the information that describes WebMCP tools and website functions to an AI agent. The manifest describes what the website functions are called, what they do, and what inputs they accept so that AI agents can discover and use them.
  • Contaminated Output
    A contaminated output is information returned by a WebMCP tool that contains malicious instructions.

A malicious manifest may contain prompt injection attacks hidden in tool names, descriptions, or parameters. These instructions are designed to manipulate or hijack an AI agent’s behavior.

The second attack vector, contaminated outputs, is information returned by a WebMCP tool that contains malicious instructions. Chrome warns that even trusted tools can return contaminated outputs when they include third-party content such as user comments, reviews, forum posts, or other externally supplied data.

These attacks work because large language models process instructions and data together. A model may not reliably distinguish between a user’s request and malicious instructions hidden within content it consumes. Chrome describes this as indirect prompt injection and notes that the prevalence of these attacks on the web is increasing.

Chrome Says AI Models Cannot Reliably Stop Prompt Injection

The agent security guidance states:

“LLMs treat all text, instructions and user data, as a single sequence of tokens. This means that they’re susceptible to indirect prompt injection, an inclusion of malicious instructions by an attacker. While some models include safety layers against prompt injection, the probabilistic nature of LLMs makes it impossible to guarantee safety inside the model itself.

Security researchers have repeatedly demonstrated prompt injection attacks against agentic systems that use state-of-the-art LLMs, and the prevalence of attacks on the web is increasing.”

Chrome also points to repeated demonstrations of prompt injection attacks against agentic systems and cites increasing prompt injection activity on the web.

Chrome Recommends Layered Security Controls

Instead of relying on the model to recognize malicious instructions, Chrome recommends a defense-in-depth strategy that combines deterministic controls with probabilistic safeguards. In this context, deterministic means predictable, rule-based, and binary guardrails.

Among the deterministic controls Chrome recommends are:

  • Setting token limits on tool responses
  • Restricting cross-origin interactions
  • Requiring user confirmation before actions are taken
  • Recognizing and handling content marked as untrusted

Chrome also says limiting the web origins an agent can interact with can reduce opportunities for unauthorized actions and data exfiltration, particularly when agents operate inside authenticated user sessions.

The guidance also stresses keeping humans in the loop and treating WebMCP tools as capable of modifying state unless they are explicitly identified as read-only.

For additional protection, Chrome recommends techniques such as spotlighting untrusted content, prompt injection classifiers that scan tool descriptions and outputs, and secondary “critic” models that evaluate planned tool calls before execution.

Guidance For WebMCP Tool Developers

The tool security guidance focuses on developers building websites and applications that expose WebMCP tools to AI agents.

Chrome recommends using annotation hints that help agents understand how tool output should be handled. One example is untrustedContentHint, which can be applied when a tool returns user-generated content or externally sourced information. According to Chrome, the hint signals that the output should receive additional scrutiny.

Developers are also encouraged to use readOnlyHint for tools that do not modify state, helping agents make better decisions about when user confirmation is necessary.

Chrome’s implementation enables developers to specify trusted origins through an exposedTo setting, limiting access to approved sites. The guidance notes that even read-only tools can reveal user information and should only be shared with trusted origins.

Takeaway

The most notable aspect of the guidance is not the individual security recommendations but Chrome’s acknowledgment that prompt injection remains a fundamental challenge for AI agents.

Rather than presenting model improvements as the solution, Chrome’s guidance assumes attackers will succeed in placing malicious instructions in tool descriptions, tool outputs, and third-party content. The recommended response is a layered security architecture that combines access controls, content isolation, human oversight, monitoring, and independent validation systems.

Chrome’s guidance treats AI agent security as a shared responsibility between agent developers and tool developers across the WebMCP ecosystem

Featured Image by Shutterstock/A9 STUDIO

The “steroid olympics” were a circus—and a window into our culture

Testosterone. Methenolone. Nandrolone. Human growth hormone and EPO. Meldonium, modafinil, and mixed amphetamine salts. Clomiphene, anastrozole, levothyroxine, and liothyronine. Patches and capsules, creams and pills. A whole galaxy of steroids, metabolic modulators, and synthetic hormones coursing through the blood of a few dozen swimmers, sprinters, and weightlifters. And millions of dollars up for grabs for athletes who could break world records and usher in the age of superhumanity.

On Sunday, May 24, at a $50 million arena built in a casino parking lot in Las Vegas, I witnessed a libertarian thought experiment come to life. The inaugural Enhanced Games were the first sporting competition where participants were encouraged to take performance-enhancing drugs. The founders say they’re challenging dated sporting norms and helping to build a world where we can all live better, longer lives. Critics say the event is an embarrassment, that it glamorizes the use of dangerous substances and puts lives at risk. 

The open-air venue was compact and decked out in bright blue, with a six-lane, 100-meter track down one side, a four-lane Olympic-length swimming pool down the other, and a weightlifting platform and stage at the front. You could see the golden façade of the Trump Hotel looming in the background. The scene had all the trappings of an NFL game, with the too-loud music and crowd work on the big screen—a “flex cam”  gave the well-muscled an excuse to unveil their biceps. Between events, adverts flashed up for the line of performance products sold by Enhanced, the company behind the event: injectable peptides that supposedly support cellular energy and skin elasticity, daily supplement powders with names like “Stronger” and “Longer.”

James Magnussen, wearing his race goggles and cap, stretches his arms above him

SAEED RAHBARAN
the Enhanced Games stadium from an elevated viewing angle

SAEED RAHBARAN

Australian swimmer James Magnussen was the first athlete to sign up with Enhanced but hasn’t broken any world records. He finished last in his two events in Las Vegas.

The day started with the weightlifters, under the blazing sun. But by 4 p.m., only one of them had even attempted a world-record lift. Two had pulled out injured. Some athletes were competing without taking drugs because of the money on offer, and as the competition went on, they had the better of their enhanced peers: Hunter Amstrong, a 25-year-old American swimmer and triple Olympic medalist, won the backstroke by more than a second. In the men’s 100-meter sprint, the non-enhanced US athlete Fred Kerley romped to an easy victory. “Man, they gotta do better than that,” he said of his doped opponents in his post-race interview. “They need to train a little harder, get on that shit a little bit more.”

At the bar, bodybuilders swapped before-and-after pictures and talked about their stacks, and VCs and finance bros traded LinkedIn details. Lukas Lakutsin, a 6-foot-10, 354-pound Russian bodybuilder who was milling around the entrance to the VIP suites, initially told me he didn’t use any performance-enhancing drugs. Except testosterone replacement therapy, of course. But he didn’t think that really counted. “I’m almost 34 years old,” he said. “I need to do this to stay strong.”

close up shot of a man's muscled chest
The “protocol” for Enhanced athletes only includes FDA-approved drugs. While Enhanced’s team might make recommendations, individuals have the final say on what they want to take, if anything.
SAEED RAHBARAN

Jeremy Sigal, an influencer and author, wore a USA tank top that showed off hugely muscled arms adorned with prison tattoos. He told me he was proudly natural, in both his health and his personal life. “I’ve got an exceptional credit score,” he said. He has written 12 books on marketing and leadership. Later, I looked up his most recent book online. It’s called Simp to Pimp: 10 Steps to Fix Why She’s Not Banging You and lists AI as a coauthor.

What I saw in Las Vegas probably wasn’t the future of sport. But it was a perfect encapsulation of our present moment, as Silicon Valley biohackers, alt-right looksmaxxers, Make America Healthy Again boosters, and longevity-obsessed scientists all vie to remake reality in their own image. For them, the Enhanced Games offered a glimpse of a future where medical advances push the human race to new heights, and where they never have to get old. 

I’ve tracked Enhanced’s journey from a crazy idea scribbled on a napkin to a public company valued at $1.2 billion. Behind the scenes, there have been power struggles, life-changing victories, and moments of total farce. As I recently, finally, watched the games unfold, two questions bounced around my head: Were they right? And what does that mean for the rest of us?


In December 2022, the Australian entrepreneur Aron D’Souza flew to Miami to spend New Year’s Eve with his friend and mentor Peter Thiel. A decade earlier, D’Souza had helped Thiel orchestrate the lawsuit that bankrupted Gawker—a stunning revenge against the gossipy New York media blog that had outed him as gay. Now he was armed with a disruptive idea that he thought Thiel, the billionaire cofounder of PayPal and Palantir, would love. It was inspired by the buff bodies he’d been seeing at the gym, highlighting a disconnect between a workout culture where the use of steroids was an open secret and a sporting establishment where it was, at least on paper, an inviolable taboo.

His initial pitch was provocative and confrontational: a grand sporting event to rival the Olympic Games, where competitors could take any substance they wanted—their body, their choice. The first time I met D’Souza, in the spring of 2024, he had founded the company and attracted some initial investment but seemed obsessed with taking on the fat cats at the International Olympic Committee and reinventing sports (even though he didn’t seem to be a huge sports fan himself). On Enhanced’s Discord server, I found a folder full of memes with names like IOC Clowns.jpg. The whole thing felt very unserious.

That would change. 

D’Souza told me that Thiel had previously introduced him to Christian Angermayer, a German biotech billionaire, who would come onboard at Enhanced. He’s funded clinical trials of psychedelics through his company Atai Life Sciences and is helping bring them into the medical mainstream as a treatment for depression and anxiety. Angermayer says he spotted an opportunity to do the same thing for steroids. What he really wants is to redefine medicine, he told me. Its focus has already changed from treating disease to trying to prevent it; actively enhancing people’s health, he says, is just the next logical step.

By early 2024, Angermayer had brought his own people into key roles. The team included Michael Sagner, an anti-aging expert and private doctor who works with many of Hollywood’s leading men, and Max Martin, who has the jawline and cheekbones of an Instagram looksmaxxing influencer and the boundless enthusiasm of a puppy. (He started his own enhancement program a few years ago, when he was just 27.) Sagner would head up Enhanced’s medical commission, making sure the games were safe for the athletes. It was Martin’s job to make sure they actually happened. 

a group of men in business suits posing at the desk of the NYSE
In early May, Enhanced began trading on the New York Stock Exchange with an initial value of $1.2 billion. Christian Angermayer stands far right with Max Martin to his left (front row), and Aron D’Souza next to him.
LEV RADIN/ZUMA PRESS WIRE VIA ALAMY

Tensions sparked as D’Souza’s freewheeling style clashed with the more sensible image that Sagner and others were now keen to present. “It was not just his personality and his abrasive way of talking,” Sagner told me recently. “Even when he was briefed on a scientific fact, he would just completely ignore it and say something outrageous.”

But the more outrageous D’Souza got, the more attention his idea received. In February 2024, James Magnussen, a retired Australian swimmer, became the organization’s first official athlete, and Enhanced promised to pay a million dollars to him, or anyone else, who could break the world record in the 50-meter freestyle.

The notion of a “steroid olympics,” as many have dubbed the Enhanced Games, had been kicking around for decades—for instance, in a Wired article from the early 2000s and an SNL sketch from the 1980s. Two things helped finally make the Enhanced Games a reality. First, in November 2024, Donald Trump was again elected president of the United States. The Biden administration had been actively hostile to the games, but the founders saw a more receptive political environment in Trump world. Not long after the election, Enhanced announced a new tranche of funding led by 1789 Capital, a venture capital firm whose partners include Donald Trump Jr.

And second, in February 2025, an enhanced swimmer finished the 50-meter freestyle faster than anyone in human history. It wasn’t Magnussen, though. He had been injecting himself with testosterone to grow muscle, plus a cocktail of peptides that aimed to speed up recovery—but his journey hadn’t quite worked the way he’d planned.

A combination of reputational issues (no pools wanted to host his training) and physical complications (the regimen did help him get stronger, but he packed on so much muscle that it slowed him down in the water) meant he watched from the sidelines as the Bulgarian-Greek swimmer Kristian Gkolomeev—who had finished fifth at the Paris Olympics in 2024—came in two-hundredths of a second under the record and won a million-dollar payout from Enhanced. The idea has always been that breaking records would effectively prove the legitimacy of this enhancement project: Look what we can do now

Over the shoulders of Shane Ryan (left) and James Magnussen (right) as they sit and talk poolside
Enhanced swimmers like Magnussen (right) wore supersuits to compete, though they’ve been banned by World Aquatics since 2010.
SAEED RAHBARAN

SAEED RAHBARAN

Gkolomeev, though, had a different motivation for participating: “One successful year in the Enhanced Games and I could make as much as I would in almost 10 careers,” he told me not long after setting the new record (notably, wearing a kind of “supersuit” that’s been banned by World Aquatics since 2010). Enhanced was paying its athletes a regular salary, on top of any potential bonus. And he had a young family to support and feared that the four-year stretch to the next Olympics would be long and precarious. 

In May 2025, with a world record in the bag and a friendly administration in the White House, Enhanced was ready to announce its first games: They’d take place in May 2026 at Resorts World in Las Vegas. 

At the same time, D’Souza made another big reveal: Enhanced Performance Products, a line of supplements available for a monthly subscription. The Enhanced Games now seemed less like a sporting event and more like a loss leader for selling testosterone injections, GLP-1s, or a range of peptides that are claimed, with little scientific evidence, to improve sleep or skin elasticity. Perhaps it was all a brilliantly executed marketing stunt.

“The games themselves now seem almost secondary to what appears to be an online marketplace for hormones, peptides, and other performance-enhancing compounds,” says Astrid Kristine Bjørnebekk, a steroids expert at Oslo University Hospital. “From my perspective, this significantly changes the nature of the project. It is one thing to organize a closed sporting event built around controversial principles, but openly marketing and commercializing substances such as testosterone, hGH, GLP-1 drugs, peptides, and other pharmacological compounds is something else entirely.”


As the games approached, more athletes joined. Some were genuinely elite. The US sprinter Kerley—who is serving a two-year ban for missing three drug tests—had won silver in the 100 meters in the Tokyo Olympics and a bronze in Paris. Ben Proud, a British swimmer, had won silver at the Paris Olympics and dozens of medals at world and European championships and the Commonwealth Games. He had been mulling over joining the Enhanced Games ever since the idea first emerged, but the tipping point seemed to come when Gkolomeev’s record was announced. 

Some participants, like Magnussen and another swimmer, Megan Romano, had been tempted out of retirement. Romano hadn’t swum competitively for almost a decade. Others were at the start of their careers but ready to cash in their chips and bid goodbye to Olympic dreams for a potential six-figure payday. The $1 million payouts were reserved for records in the two flagship events—the 50-meter freestyle and the 100-meter sprint—but winning any other event would mean a prize of $250,000, with an additional $250,000 bonus for setting a world record.

Athletes would get paid even if they just showed up and finished last—as much as $50,000. This is all on top of the salaries that stretched into six figures in some cases, making the payout from the games more than many athletes make in a year.

Sport’s governing bodies reacted to each new athlete announcement with fury. World Aquatics threatened to ban for life any athlete who participated in the games, even if they didn’t take any drugs. Enhanced responded with an $800 million antitrust lawsuit against the global swimming organization, the World Anti-Doping Agency, and USA Swimming, alleging misuse of monopoly power.

Emmanuel Matadi (left) and Fred Kerley (right) running on the track
American Fred Kerley (right) won the 100-meter sprint without performance enhancing drugs.
SAEED RAHBARAN

In November 2025, a court in New York dismissed the case. Three days later, D’Souza, the mind behind the entire project, was out. A notice on Enhanced’s website said he had “transitioned out of the company’s day-to-day operations.” Martin would take over as CEO. “The investors basically said we need someone a bit more serious,” Sagner told me. In conversations, execs at Enhanced played down any suggestion of a feud—D’Souza was simply the ideas man, with little interest in the day-to-day dreariness of actually running a company. (Enhanced spokesperson Chris Jones wrote in a statement that “there is no tension between Aron and Enhanced that I’m aware of.” D’Souza did not respond to a request for comment.)

I got the sense that Enhanced, in its new iteration as a pharmaceutical subscription company, was almost embarrassed by the games. When I visited enhanced.com a couple of months before the event, they had been relegated to a sub-heading on the home page. D’Souza’s showmanship had helped get attention for what was becoming a run-of-the-mill telehealth business like Hims & Hers—albeit one well timed to take advantage of a shifting regulatory landscape around peptides, which Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the US secretary of health and human services, has been pushing the FDA to approve despite a lack of evidence that they’re actually effective. 

Sagner is still loosely involved with Enhanced, but he says the medical commission was not consulted before it launched its line of performance products. (Jones did not respond to a question regarding this claim.) Sagner is scathing about what he sees as the “hype” around peptides. “I can tell you already, peptides do nothing,” he says—with the exception of human growth hormone and GLP-1. “The peptides that people use, black-market peptides that they buy online—they do nothing. We have tested them; 80% of them contain nothing. It’s saline solution, salt water, and some of them are contaminated.”


At the end of January 2026, a group of around 40 swimmers, weightlifters, and sprinters arrived in Abu Dhabi to start their individualized enhancement “protocol,” as Enhanced calls it. Officially, they would be taking part in a clinical trial, pending approval by the Abu Dhabi government and overseen by Guido Pieles, a Qatar-based cardiologist who has taken over the reins of Enhanced’s medical commission from Sagner.

Canadian weightlifter Boady Santavy strains to lift a barbell which is currently level with his hips
The day started with the weightlifters, but by late afternoon, only one of them had even attempted a world-record lift.
SAEED RAHBARAN

They would be allowed to choose only from a menu  of specific FDA-approved drugs. Pieles broke them down into five categories: testosterone variants and growth hormones, which can both boost muscle mass; metabolic modulators that can tweak how the body burns fat; stimulants like Adderall to improve focus; and EPO, which can increase the amount of oxygen the blood is able to carry. While Enhanced’s team might recommend particular things, the athletes would have the final say on what they wanted to take, if anything. (As Oslo University’s Bjørnebekk points out, FDA approval “does not mean the substances are inherently safe, particularly not when used for enhancement purposes.”) 

There would be regular blood tests, heart scans, and brain scans and access to the best training facilities money could buy. Pieles and others say the clinical trial will help inform the line of supplements Enhanced is offering consumers, but there’s actually very little overlap between the drugs the athletes were taking and the substances the company is currently selling.  

Not long after they arrived in the Middle East, the athletes were awakened by the sound of explosions at a military base near their hotel. The US and Israel had struck Iran, and the Iranian regime was responding by peppering the region with missiles. “It wasn’t a pleasant situation,” says Andrii Govorov, the world record holder in the 50-meter butterfly, who a year earlier had become one of the first swimmers to join Enhanced. Govorov had some experience in these matters—back in Ukraine, he’d had a business selling cars that helped fund his swimming career, but he’d lost it after the Russian invasion.

Cody Miller standing by the pool in profile

SAEED RAHBARAN
attendees sitting in the bleachers

SAEED RAHBARAN
close-up of the calloused and powdered hands of a weightlifter with remnants and marks left by the tape.

SAEED RAHBARAN

Swimming, sprinting, and weightlifting were the focus of the first Enhanced Games but in many ways the sports were the sideshow.

The conflict exacerbated delays in getting approval for the clinical trial and sourcing the drugs, and as a result, what was supposed to be a 12-week enhancement protocol got cut down to eight weeks. The athletes didn’t actually start taking the drugs until toward the end of March. For those who had always been clean, that represented the irreversible crossing of a line. “The first injection was very emotional, very tricky to navigate,” says Proud. “For me, that was the day I went from the Ben Proud that I always knew to a new person.”

Proud was joined in the enhancement program by his girlfriend, Emily Barclay, who had swum at college level without ever appearing at a major international event; she was working as a swimming teacher at a school in England. After that first injection, they left Abu Dhabi and spent a few days in Dubai as they reckoned with what they had done. “I just couldn’t be around the team,” Proud says. “I wanted to be by myself and feel those feelings, because it is a big deal to make that step, and I felt it.”

Those feelings were soon forgotten, though, as the drugs kicked in. Proud says he had incredible energy, and a drive to train that he hadn’t experienced before. Shania Collins, an American sprinter, says she had “increased strength, increased recovery, and increased mental clarity at practice.” Sagner and several athletes admitted there were some side effects: acne and some swelling around the joints; unwanted hair growth for the women, unwanted hair loss for the men.

close-up of runner Tristan Evelyn in profile
Like Kerley, sprinter Tristan Evelyn from Barbados competed without taking any drugs. She too won big in Vegas, besting her Enhanced peers in two events.
SAEED RAHBARAN

One thing the athletes wouldn’t talk about, though, is what drugs they were actually taking. They all had the same reason: not wanting to encourage copycats who might take enhancements without a doctor on hand to tailor programs to their needs. 

The one exception was Thor Björnsson (testosterone, deca-durabolin, anastrozole, halotestin), a hulking Icelandic deadlifter and former World’s Strongest Man who played The Mountain on Game of Thrones. Björnsson first heard about the games on Joe Rogan’s podcast and was immediately interested. The rules for strongman competitions are somewhat less stringent than those for Olympic sports, though, and he actually had to reduce the number of substances he was taking to meet Enhanced’s FDA requirements.

Hafþór Júlíus Björnsson holding a barbell at mid thigh
Icelandic strongman Thor Björnsson actually had to reduce the number of substances he was taking to meet Enhanced’s FDA requirements.
SAEED RAHBARAN

There is some debate over how much doping some of the athletes were actually doing. In a conversation last year, Gkolomeev told me he’d only really been “microdosing,” and he confirmed that his 2026 enhancement program was largely the same. Sagner says the doses the athletes were taking were a fraction of the amounts some Olympic athletes had been caught using in the past. I heard that a few athletes had decided not to take steroids or growth hormones and were only using modafinil, a narcolepsy medication that’s thought to improve focus.

The day before the games, I asked Angermayer what it would mean if clean athletes like Kerley and Armstrong won their events—what impact it would have on Enhanced’s business model of using sports as a showcase for its line of performance products if the people using those products didn’t actually win anything. “I know what you mean, but mostly our business model is headlines to drive attention,” he said. “Any debate is good for us.” 

In early May, Enhanced began trading on the New York Stock Exchange with an initial value of $1.2 billion.


That same week, it was finally go time. The athletes and coaches left Abu Dhabi and flew to Las Vegas, where they were put up in five-star luxury at the Conrad hotel inside Resorts World while they made their final preparations. 

When I got there a few weeks later, toward the end of May, I found it jarring to see these hulking presences walking around the casino in their Enhanced sportswear, weaving their way through packs of half-drunk tourists, with slot machines flashing in the background and cigarette smoke hanging in the air. I had expected the games to be a bigger deal within the city itself, but they were just one of a thousand things happening in Vegas that weekend—drowned out by a series of BTS shows at the football stadium, by the Golden Knights in the NHL playoffs, by No Doubt’s residency at the Sphere.

If this was a sporting earthquake, it was one whose tremors were mainly being felt online, where bodybuilding influencers livestreamed to their followers on Kick and Twitch, and where thousands watched on YouTube and Rumble. (D’Souza once told me he’d had “every major sports broadcaster” vying for the rights; in the end, Enhanced struck an exclusive streaming deal with Roku in the US.) 

A group of well-heeled guests in the VIP area face left to pose for a photographer
No tickets were sold, so the crowd was a mix of invited guests, investors, and influencers, some of whom had reportedly been flown in on a chartered jet.
SAEED RAHBARAN

On the morning of the games, Enhanced held a medical symposium that was supposed to provide a taste of the company’s long-term objectives. The first speaker was Bryan Johnson, the longevity-obsessed entrepreneur famous for plowing his personal fortune into wild attempts to reverse his aging: receiving transfusions of his teenage son’s plasma, measuring his nighttime erections, taking more than 100 supplement pills a day. He spends $2 million per year on all this, but he looked pale and vampiric as he delivered the slightly off-brand message that, really, the most important thing was getting a good night’s sleep: “You don’t need to chase IV infusions; you don’t need to chase crystals. You don’t really need to do much of anything.”

At 2 p.m., I took two escalators from the conference room down to the arena, where spectators were filtering in. Though it had cost $50 million, it had been constructed in just three and a half weeks, and it showed; on the media tour the previous day, there were still loose screws on the floor of the bleachers. 

There were a few thousand seats in an open grandstand down one side, and two rows of VIP suites on the other. No tickets were sold, so it was a strange mix of invited guests, investors, and influencers, some of whom had reportedly been flown in from Los Angeles on a chartered jet. The rapper Tyga was the biggest name to grace the “blue carpet,” although I did also spot Fabio James, a Michael Jackson look-alike who has had surgery to make the resemblance even stronger. Rumors swirled that Peter Thiel might show up; they proved unfounded.

looking up at a balcony of excited attendees including a person at center who is dressed to resemble Michael Jackson.
In attendance was Fabio James, a Michael Jackson look-alike who has had surgery to make the resemblance even stronger.
SAEED RAHBARAN

A few hours before the doors opened, journalists got a stern message from the organizers trying to bar us from interviewing guests. Still, I talked to a Cambridge professor who wanted to use Enhanced as a case study in innovation for his MBA students, a retired Brazilian swimmer with the Olympic rings tattooed on his forearm, and a biotech investor wearing an Enron hat. Proud’s family and friends were sheltered from the blazing sun in the shadow of the big screen. 

D’Souza was nowhere to be seen. Nor was he really mentioned at all—not during the introductory press conference, where Martin was introduced as the “founder of the Enhanced Games,” nor during the event itself, where the athletes showered praise on Angermayer and Martin. But the tens of millions D’Souza had banked from the stock listing likely softened any blow. Plus, he’s already moved on to his next provocative venture: an AI-powered arbitration platform designed to scrutinize the work of journalists on behalf of the rich and powerful.


As the sun set behind the hills, casting the arena in soft gold light, there were still no world records. That and the wins for clean athletes seemed to put the whole Enhanced project in jeopardy—the knives were already being sharpened online. I asked the organizers whether this threatened the legitimacy of the project. 

A wet Marius Kusch lays on the ground grimacing as though his eyes are stinging
German swimmer Marius Kusch was among the dozen or so athletes who hit personal bests in Vegas.
SAEED RAHBARAN

“Our response is that enhancements help athletes improve and, in some cases, break records. And yes, some non-enhanced athletes also won—because talent and ability also matter,” Enhanced’s Jones emailed last week. “Breaking world records is incredibly hard as the margin is infinitesimal, as we witnessed. Ignoring that 13 athletes some of whom 10 years later broke personal bests is disingenuous and selective reporting.” 

Megan Romano was one of them, swimming faster in the 50-meter freestyle at 35 than she had at 22. And Emily Barclay knocked two seconds off her fastest time in the 100-meter freestyle, coming in second in that event and winning the 50-meter freestyle; she went home with a check for $375,000. “No one’s ever heard of this girl,” said Enhanced swim coach Brett Hawke afterwards. “She’s retired; she’s a nobody. She comes out tonight and swims a time that would have got a bronze medal in Paris.” For all the talk of “superhumanity” and pushing the boundaries of performance, making a 35-year-old feel 22 again is probably the perfect marketing message for the products Enhanced wants to sell. 

Megan Romano stands on the winners area, holding aloft her trophy while Christian Angermeyer and other Enhanced Game participants clap for her.
Angermayer cheers on swimmer Megan Romano, who swam faster in the 50-meter freestyle at 35 than she did at 22.
SAEED RAHBARAN

Enhanced’s executives say people should take enhancements only with medical supervision, but price could be a barrier to heeding that advice. The battery of health tests the company was giving its athletes in the run-up to the games cost $25,000 per athlete per month. The drugs themselves start at $75 a month and go up toward $200. While Jones says the products “are in line with industry price points,” there were almost certainly people watching who saw the drug-altered physiques of athletes like Gkolomeev or Magnussen and decided to find cheaper, less safe alternatives on unlicensed websites.

“Many of these substances require medical supervision and prescriptions, and several are associated with potentially serious long-term health consequences,” says Bjørnebekk. “Presenting them in this lifestyle-oriented and commercial format risks normalizing use while downplaying the medical risks and uncertainties.”

Kristian Gkolomeev with his arm raised
Although his world record-breaking time won’t stand as the official record, swimmer Kristian Gkolomeev will walk away from the Enhanced Games with a million dollar prize in the 50-meter freestyle.
SAEED RAHBARAN

Before the night was over,  Gkolomeev again had the chance to right the Enhanced ship. The final event of the night was the men’s 50-meter freestyle swim. His 2025 time had been surpassed by the Australian swimmer Cam McEvoy (without a supersuit) at the China Swimming Open a couple of months before, so he needed to lose another two-hundredths of a second to beat the new record of 20.88 seconds. 

Gkolomeev was wearing the same supersuit he’d used the previous year, and he’d shaved off his mustache for a little extra streamlining. But he messed up his start—doing four kicks instead of five—and was trailing Proud at the halfway mark. His long arms levered him forward, though, and he reached the wall in 20.81. The spectators were on their feet as “WORLD RECORD” flashed red on the big screen. Martin vaulted over the glass partition from the VIP suites, beaming, to embrace Gkolomeev. They had their record.

Or did they? Online, people shared screenshots from the video feed, purporting to show that the clock had stopped before Gkolomeev’s hand touched the pressure sensor at the end of the pool. An Enhanced spokesperson gave a statement to the Guardian dismissing this as “completely unfounded internet drivel.” But hey—live by the sword, die by the sword. It’s quite possible Gkolomeev didn’t care. He had another million in the bank. 

It remains to be seen if it’ll work out so well for the other athletes. Enhanced organizers recently announced a prize of $10 million for anyone who can break Usain Bolt’s 100-meter world record in 2027. They are adamant that the games will happen again next year. If they don’t, dozens of sporting careers will be over, and the athletes will join the long list of victims of VC-backed disruption.

My personal prediction is that Enhanced will pivot away from the risk and uncertainty of a flagship event—the company’s valuation plunged by almost $800 million when markets opened after what was perceived as an underwhelming set of results in Vegas. I expect you’ll see individual stunts and challenges, tightly controlled and filmed for virality and probably featuring your favorite YouTubers—think Björnsson bench-pressing Jake Paul.

D’Souza’s initial idea has served its purpose by capturing the world’s attention. But that won’t necessarily translate into success either. Though the company has had plenty of hype over the last 12 months, SEC filings published as part of its stock exchange listing reveal that it generated only $2,755 in revenue from its enhancements business in the first three months of 2026. Would what happened in Vegas be enough to juice sales?

Max Martin with his mouth open wide to cheer from the VIP stands
Martin, Enhanced’s CEO, cheers on athletes from the stands. Company leadership insists the competition will take place again next year.
SAEED RAHBARAN

As the athletes gathered on the stage to receive their prizes, Martin took the microphone and addressed the crowd. “Enhanced is culture,” he said. “We are at the pulse of where the world is going.” On this, at least, he’s probably right. Testosterone replacement therapy is rapidly moving into the mainstream, and while the science may still not be there on peptides, they have certainly exploded in popularity in the two years since Enhanced launched. And there are undoubtedly more substances yet to be discovered that will promise to improve people’s lives, or at least hold their appearance in stasis. The enhanced age is upon us, whether we want it or not. 

As the fireworks went off and the Killers closed out the event with “When You Were Young” (“Congratulations to … whoever deserves it,” said frontman Brandon Flowers), I wondered what that might mean for us mere mortals. Invoking Hunter S. Thompson’s Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas in a story about drugs and Las Vegas may be a cliché, but it struck me that fear played a big part in all of this. Fear of missing out. Fear of getting old. Fear of never making a dime on your life’s pursuit. Fear of waking up one morning and seeing your flabby, sunken face in the mirror while everyone around you shines and grins and thrives with white-toothed, alien smiles.

Megan Romano in cap and goggles with her dry robe stands backlit by pink event lighting and stage fog
Before joining Enhanced, Romano had not swum competitively in almost a decade.
SAEED RAHBARAN

But the big problem with Enhanced’s vision of superhumanity is the question of who gets to join in. “People will be able to enhance themselves if they have enough money,” Sagner had told me the night before the games. The rest of us, I fear, will just have to function as normal human beings.

Amit Katwala is a journalist and author covering science, culture, and where they collide. His latest book is Tremors in the Blood: Murder, Obsession and the Birth of the Lie Detector. He is based in London.

The Download: the “steroid olympics” and a safer Mythos

This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology.

The “steroid olympics” were a circus—and a window into our culture

—Amit Katwala

A couple of weeks ago, at a $50 million arena built in a casino parking lot in Las Vegas, I witnessed a libertarian thought experiment come to life. The inaugural Enhanced Games were the first sporting competition where participants were encouraged to take performance-enhancing drugs.

For supporters of the event, the Enhanced Games offered a glimpse of a future in which medical advances push the human race to new heights—and they never have to get old. As I watched the games unfold, two questions bounced around my head: were they right? And what does that mean for the rest of us?

Read the full story to understand the answers.

MIT Technology Review Narrated: a reality check on the AI jobs hysteria

Despite the growing hysteria over AI’s threat to white-collar jobs, there’s still scant evidence that the technology has had a large-scale impact on the labor market.

Analysis of US labor data shows that unemployment in occupations most exposed to AI is actually lower than in less-exposed jobs. There are also no signs that large numbers of workers are shifting from AI-threatened professions into supposedly safer manual-labor jobs.

It’s true that things aren’t great in the job market. But the reason isn’t simply the rise of AI.


—David Rotman

This is our latest story to be turned into an MIT Technology Review Narrated podcast, which we publish each week on Spotify and Apple Podcasts. Just navigate to MIT Technology Review Narrated on either platform, and follow us to get all our new content as it’s released.

The must-reads

I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.

1 Anthropic has released a “safe” version of Mythos
It promises it has enough guardrails and user limitations to be safe. (BBC)
+ It has a price tag twice as high as the previous flagship system. (NYT $)
+ Anthropic previously claimed Mythos was too dangerous to release. (CNBC)
+ But critics suspect that was a marketing play. (Guardian)
+ Selective access has become a key strategy for AI labs. (Axios)

2 Seattle has banned new data centers for a year
It’s the largest US city to have passed such a moratorium.(Guardian)
+ Its biggest tech firm, Amazon, has tried to stop the ban. (The Verge)
+ The movement to stop data centers is growing. (NYT $)

3 Democratic senators are pushing for a military AI restriction law
They want a human commander to have the final say. (Gizmodo)
+ But humans in the loop in an AI war is an illusion. (MIT Technology Review)

4 SpaceX plans to launch space data center tests by late 2027
Orbital compute is central to the company’s growth pitch. (Reuters $)
+ It’s also shared new designs for its space data centers. (BI)
+ We’d need these four things to put them in orbit. (MIT Technology Review)

5 China has been accused of escalating AI espionage
A report claims Beijing is hacking tech firms to catch up with the US. (CNBC)
+ There are no winners in a US-China AI arms race. (MIT Technology Review)

6 The Trump family has made about $2.3 billion from crypto
While investors lost about the same amount. (Gizmodo)
+ The Trumps risked next-to-nothing on their crypto ventures. (Reuters $)

7 Apple isn’t launching Siri AI in the European Union
It’s blaming EU interoperability requirements. (The Verge)
+Brussels says Apple didn’t try to find a compliance solution. (Reuters $) 

8 China’s new drone rules have spooked its thriving industry 
Drone firms face new commercial barriers. (Financial Times $)
+ China’s drone sector leads the world. (NYT $)

9 A judge has cancelled a trial after finding both legal teams used AI
The case descended into GenAI tools arguing against each other. (404 Media)
+ Courts have been flooded with AI-generated lawsuits. (MIT Technology Review)

10 The dinosaur-killing asteroid created a thriving new ecosystem
Microscopic life flourished in the extended heat. (New Scientist $)

Quote of the day

“AI technologies today are designed by and for WEIRD societies—Western, educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic.” 

—Aditya Vashistha, an assistant professor at Cornell University, tells Rest of World why AI systems don’t serve global needs.

One More Thing

LAUREN SIMKIN BERKE


Why the definition of design might need a change

The word “design” once carried a far wider set of meanings than it does today. They ranged from the literal and material (like tracing) through the tactical (to contrive and achieve a goal) to the organizational and institutional—the “designation” of people and objects.

Over centuries, as designing became increasingly separated from making, that broader understanding faded. But now there is a growing case for reclaiming the word’s original sense: not just the search for a more beautiful shape, but the shaping of a more beautiful and sustainable world. 

Find out why we should retool the word “design.”

—Nicholas de Monchaux

We can still have nice things

A place for comfort, fun, and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line.)

+ This history of humanity’s search for alien life is fascinating.
+ Watch a damaged painting slowly return to life in this art restoration video.
+ Admire young stars across every stage of cosmic formation in this stunning space picture of the month.
+ Daredevil divers have captured the first-ever underwater footage of an adult great white in the Mediterranean Sea.

New Ecommerce Tools: June 10, 2026

This installment of our weekly, curated rundown includes new products and services for livestream commerce, direct checkout, business agents, cryptocurrencies, visual search, logistics, media platforms, listing strategies, and AI-powered product intelligence.

Got an ecommerce product release? Email updates@practicalecommerce.com.

New Tools for Merchants

Ordoro and ConnectBooks integrate for ecommerce reporting. Ordoro, a platform for shipping, inventory, and fulfillment, and ConnectBooks, an accounting platform for ecommerce sellers, have announced an integration to help merchants with financial reporting. Together, the two companies help merchants connect inventory cost data to financials to provide greater visibility into costs, margins, and performance.

Home page of ConnectBooks

ConnectBooks

Google Pay expands with direct checkout. Google Pay has introduced direct checkout, which integrates customers’ Google Wallet payment options into the checkout pages of participating merchants. The experience has launched for select merchants that use third-party payment services Airwallet and Adyen. Google plans to scale the capability to partners worldwide. Google has also updated Secure Payment Authentication to streamline transactions, ensuring safeguards for payment credentials and personal data.

Etsy adds a listing strategies feature for ads. Etsy Ads has released listing strategies to guide budget allocations, listing by listing. For daily ad budgets of $25 or more, sellers can choose a strategy for each listing rather than an entire campaign. According to Etsy, this provides more flexibility, whether getting bestsellers in front of more buyers or keeping costs in check.

Kyzuvex launches AI livestream commerce ecosystem. Kyzuvex has launched an AI Virtual Livestream Commerce Ecosystem. Key features include virtual hosts, real-time multilingual capabilities, automated product demonstrations and recommendations, intelligent customer interaction, cross-border ecommerce support, and more.

Home page of Kyzuvex

Kyzuvex

DoorDash Ads expands commerce media platform. DoorDash Ads has launched tools for format types, off-site reach, campaign automation, and measurement. Spotlight ad format is a premium home page placement to drive discovery at key moments of intent. Symbiosys, a DoorDash company, powers off-site and on-site commerce media worldwide. A partnership with LiveRamp (identity verification) enables privacy-centric measurement that matches advertiser and DoorDash data. DoorDash Ads also features enhanced Smart Campaigns with expanded promotions and auto-bidding.

Meta expands Business Agent. Meta has expanded its Business Agent on WhatsApp, Messenger, and Instagram. The Agent can answer questions specific to a business, recommend products from a catalog, book appointments, and qualify incoming leads, among other features. Meta is also introducing an agentic platform that builds, customizes, and deploys a Business Agent at scale.

Crypto fintech RedotPay launches Connect for B2B companies. RedotPay, a stablecoin-based payment company, has launched Connect, which enables B2B merchants to accept stablecoin payments while settling in local currencies. With direct access to more than 700 million global crypto users, RedotPay says it opens a new channel for merchants looking to scale beyond traditional payment ecosystems. RedotPay is also launching AI-powered agentic payments using stablecoins, extending its infrastructure from merchant acceptance into fully automated commerce.

Home page of RedotPay

RedotPay

WWEX Group and Auctane complete merger to create ShipStation Global. WWEX Group, a logistics provider, and Auctane, owner of ShipStation, Stamps.com, Metapack, and Packlink, have merged. The combined company will operate as ShipStation Global, backed by Thoma Bravo, a software-focused investment firm. The merger unites WWEX Group’s freight brokerage network with Auctane’s shipping software, global carrier connectivity, and automation.

Amazon releases real-time AI images in the search bar. Amazon has debuted visual suggestion features to enable more precise product discovery in its Shopping app’s search bar. As consumers search for products using descriptive language, AI-generated images take shape in the suggestions below the bar, shifting and refining with each word added. Customers can tap the generated image that best aligns with their vision and shop for visually similar products.

iThink Logistics debuts real-time overseas shipment tracking for India-based sellers. Ecommerce platform iThink Logistics has launched live tracking for overseas shipments of India-based sellers, including independent makers and sellers on marketplaces such as Etsy. The capability provides sellers and their international buyers with real-time visibility throughout the delivery journey, from pickup in India to destinations in more than 220 countries worldwide.

Constant Contact launches SMS marketing tool in Australia. Constant Contact has launched an SMS marketing tool for business customers in Australia. The tool brings text messaging into the company’s existing email and social marketing platform. According to Constant Contact, the service facilitates flash promotions, sale alerts, appointment reminders, booking reminders, loyalty messages, and more.

Home page of Constant Contact

Constant Contact

Hey Savi and PayPal launch agentic commerce platform with in-app checkout. Hey Savi, a U.K.-based fashion search tool, has launched an agentic commerce experience with native checkout powered by PayPal. By providing shoppers with a unified experience for research and purchase, merchants can expand their reach and drive conversions, per PayPal. Interested U.K. merchants can sign up at PayPal.ai.

Shopsense AI launches Shoppable Intelligence Model for contextual commerce. Shopsense AI, a platform for turning content into commerce, has released the Shoppable Intelligence Model, a proprietary in-house tool for training, decision-making, dataset management, and benchmarking. Shopsense AI states the model delivers 25% to 50% higher retrieval accuracy across product discovery benchmarks versus OpenAI’s CLIP and Google’s SigLIP2.

NielsenIQ launches Product Intelligence for AI-driven commerce. NielsenIQ, a consumer intelligence company, has launched NIQ Product Intelligence to help retailers and brands transform fragmented product data into structured commerce data. NielsenIQ states the new service creates a unified product layer that standardizes attributes, resolves product identity across systems, and enriches product data at scale, enabling AI systems to understand, match, and recommend products.

TeleSuite launches an ecommerce layer for Telegram. TeleSuite, a Telegram-native commerce platform for creators and brands, has launched its transaction layer. Built for the Telegram and open-network ecosystem, TeleSuite helps creators and merchants sell products, courses, and memberships inside Telegram. TeleSuite says it adds the business layer to Telegram: storefront, checkout, fulfillment, and more.

Home page of TeleSuite

TeleSuite

Google Is Adding Business Profile Tools To The Gemini App via @sejournal, @MattGSouthern

Google is adding business features to the Gemini app, including a direct connection to Google Business Profile and Business notebooks.

The company announced the updates at its Google for Brazil event. Both features will begin rolling out globally this month, excluding the EEA and UK.

Business Profile features in Gemini are being released gradually and may not appear for every eligible user yet. Once a profile is connected, Gemini can pull from the reviews, customer questions, and performance data attached to it.

Connecting Business Profiles To Gemini

The Business Profile connection arrives in the coming weeks, Google says, and works with a single tap.

Vishnu Sivaji, senior director for the Gemini app, wrote:

“Once connected, Gemini becomes an AI assistant that actually knows your business, having access to your real-world context like customer reviews, customer questions and performance data.”

Google lists three examples of what the connection enables.

  • Ask how your business did this month, and Gemini analyzes search impressions, direction requests, call data, and customer engagement.
  • Ask for help with a recent review, and it drafts a reply referencing the customer’s feedback.
  • Tell it to update operating hours, post seasonal updates, or find gaps in your profile.

Business Notebooks

Business notebooks give owners a space that holds chats, sources, a Business Profile, and a website. Gemini references that material across conversations, so context carries over between sessions.

Notebooks will surface alerts when opened, like an unanswered customer question or holiday hours that haven’t been set. It’ll also suggest operational changes, such as pricing or positioning, based on the local market.

Part Of A Broader Gemini Push

The post describes these features as building on the AI capabilities Google announced in May. Those I/O updates made Gemini 3.5 Flash the default model in AI Mode and expanded agentic features across Search.

Gemini has been moving closer to Business Profiles on the moderation side, too. Last year, Google began using Gemini to detect suspicious profile edits and fake reviews. This announcement brings Gemini into the product’s management side, after Google previously used it for profile and review enforcement.

Why This Matters

Managing a Business Profile usually means working inside the profile dashboard for each task. The Gemini connection puts review replies, profile edits, and performance questions in a chat window as well.

AI-drafted review responses still represent your business once published, so each one needs a read before it goes out.

Looking Ahead

The rollout begins this month, with the Business Profile connection following in the coming weeks. The announcement doesn’t mention availability plans for the EEA or UK.

Google Search Sends 23% Of Queries To The Open Web via @sejournal, @MattGSouthern

For every 1,000 U.S. Google searches, 232 clicks reach what SparkToro calls the open web, according to new data drawn from Similarweb’s clickstream panel.

The report, published by SparkToro co-founder Rand Fishkin, found 68% of U.S. searches ended without any click from January through April. Its 2024 report, based on Datos data, separately reported 360 open-web clicks per 1,000 U.S. Google searches.

What The Numbers Show

Data shows post-search behavior going three ways:

  1. 39% of searches end with no further action.
  2. 29% lead to a new query in Google’s search bar.
  3. 32% produce a click.

Of those clicks, 66% lead searchers to pages on the open web, while 27% go to Alphabet-owned properties and Google surfaces, including YouTube, Maps, and AI Mode. The remaining 6% goes to paid ads.

Compared with 2024 data, the share of searches that produced at least one click fell from 41% to 32%. The 9.51-point drop represents a 22% decline, the largest change among the metrics tracked. Searches leading to another search rose 7 points over the same period.

Fishkin argues the acceleration was driven mainly by AI Overviews, citing Ahrefs data on click-through declines. That data puts AI Overviews on more than 20% of searches, with click-through rates nearly 60% lower when one appears.

The direction matches other sources. Ahrefs’ separate traffic tracker recorded an 8-point drop in Google’s share of traffic to those sites between June 2025 and May 2026.

Paid Clicks Take A Larger Share

Paid’s share of all clicks rose from 1% in the 2024 data to 6% in 2026.

Fishkin cautions against reading too much into the jump. The 2024 panel from Datos had a higher-than-average share of users running ad blockers, which hid or minimized search ads. The true 2024 paid figure was likely higher, making the increase look steeper than it was.

How This Squares With Google’s Statements

Google has spent the past year arguing that AI features aren’t draining useful traffic from websites. VP of Search Liz Reid has said organic click volume is “relatively stable” and that AI Overviews mostly remove “bounce clicks,” visits where users grab a fact and leave. Google hasn’t published data supporting either claim.

SparkToro’s data tracks clicks per search. Reid’s statements concern total click volume, which can hold steady if query growth offsets a falling click rate. The panel data shows the per-search rate falling. Whether total volume is stable is something only Google can verify, and it hasn’t.

About The Data

The analysis uses Similarweb’s U.S. desktop and mobile panel (January-April). SparkToro weighted results as two-thirds mobile, one-third desktop. Fishkin says zero-click behavior in the app is likely higher than in browsers, but searches in the Google mobile app aren’t included

The 2016 and 2019 figures came from the now-defunct Jumpshot panel, the 2024 figures from Datos, and the 2026 figures from Similarweb. Fishkin calls the cross-year chart “a bit of apples and oranges.”

For transparency, SparkToro sells audience research software, and Fishkin is publishing a book on zero-click marketing with co-author Amanda Natividad.

Why This Matters

This report is a sign that traffic forecasts built on older click rates need revisiting, and the 232-per-1,000 figure gives you a concrete number for those conversations.

Fishkin writes that SEO matters as much as ever, “it just won’t earn you traffic the way it once did.” He points instead to categories that still benefit from SEO, such as branded searches, local businesses, and high-intent transactional queries, which he credits to Cyrus Shepard’s analysis.

Looking Ahead

AI Mode is the variable to watch. It accounted for 0.34% of searches in this dataset, but Google says usage has passed 1 billion monthly users, and queries are more than doubling each quarter.

SparkToro will publish zero-click figures for Europe, the UK, and Canada in the days ahead. He plans to repeat the analysis within 6 to 12 months.


Featured Image: 78image/Shutterstock

Claude Is The Fastest-Growing AI Traffic Source, Per New Data via @sejournal, @MattGSouthern

Claude sent almost four times more referral traffic to websites in April than in January, per new SE Ranking data.

That made it the fastest-growing AI traffic source among the five platforms tracked. It’s still the smallest by a wide margin, and it probably isn’t a meaningful line in your analytics yet.

For transparency, SE Ranking sells AI visibility tracking tools. The figures come from its own Google Analytics dataset.

What The Data Shows

Claude’s share of traffic in SE Ranking’s dataset grew from 0.0029% in January to 0.0141% in April, a 386% increase.

Most of that came in March, when Claude’s share went from 0.0049% to 0.0127%. SE Ranking says that’s the largest single-month jump in Claude’s history across its dataset.

AI platforms combined accounted for 0.33% of traffic as of April, up from 0.1976% a year earlier. Within that, ChatGPT generated 78.23% of AI-referred traffic across the full 16-month period. Perplexity follows at 9.33%, Gemini at 6.85%, and Copilot at 3.57%. Claude accounts for 1.40%.

Between January and April, ChatGPT’s referral traffic grew 1.53% while Gemini grew 63%. The same dataset showed Gemini passing Perplexity earlier this year.

How SE Ranking Explains The March Jump

SE Ranking ties the March increase to public attention on Anthropic in February. Anthropic said publicly it wouldn’t allow Claude to be used for mass surveillance of Americans or fully autonomous weapons. The statement came during a dispute with the Pentagon over Claude’s usage restrictions.

The report points to outside figures that move in the same direction. It cites Similarweb data showing that Claude reached 11.3 million daily active users on mobile in early March. Ramp’s AI Index, based on corporate spend data, reported Anthropic adoption at 34.4% of businesses in its data, compared with 32.3% for OpenAI.

The Report Doesn’t Mention OpenClaw

One thing missing from SE Ranking’s analysis is OpenClaw, the open-source agent framework that runs on Claude models.

OpenClaw was one of the biggest Claude-related stories of the same window. It launched in November and hit 247,000 GitHub stars by early March. Observers called it the fastest-growing project in GitHub’s history. Anthropic restricted subscription access for third-party harnesses, starting with OpenClaw, on April 4.

That’s additional context rather than an explanation for the referral numbers. Agent activity doesn’t show up as clicks from claude.ai to websites, so OpenClaw usage wouldn’t register in this dataset. It’s one more type of Claude activity that referral reports can’t see.

The US Is About Ten Months Ahead

The growth pattern looks similar across regions in the dataset, but the US leads on both scale and timing.

In April, Claude accounted for 0.0186% of US website traffic in the dataset. The EU figure was 0.0100%, and the UK was at 0.0054%.

US websites reached a Claude traffic share of 0.0022% in April 2025. Other regions didn’t hit a similar level until early 2026, roughly ten months later.

Why This Matters

The percentage increase makes the growth appear larger than the traffic behind it. A near-4x increase still leaves Claude with a small fraction of referral traffic. The numbers serve as an early signal to watch, not something to react to just yet.

SE Ranking notes that its data captures only direct clicks from AI platforms, and that Claude is used mainly for writing, coding, and analysis, not search.

Looking Ahead

The next monthly updates will show whether Claude’s March jump was a new baseline or a spike. If it holds, sites with US audiences will likely feel any change first. Positions have already moved this year, with Gemini passing Perplexity in the same dataset.


Featured Image: Blossom Stock Studio/Shutterstock

The Integrity Graph: The Missing Layer In Your AI Visibility Audit via @sejournal, @billhunt

A recent announcement from Common Crawl introduced an AI Visibility Audit designed to help organizations determine whether AI systems can discover and access their content. The premise is straightforward and difficult to dispute. Before an AI system can retrieve, summarize, cite, recommend, or act upon information, it must first be able to find it.

For years, visibility has been the foundation of search. If Google could not crawl a page, it could not rank it. If an AI system cannot access information, it cannot incorporate that information into responses, recommendations, or decisions.

Yet as I read through the announcement, I found myself thinking about a different problem entirely.

Common Crawl is not a search engine, nor is it an AI platform. It is one of the largest open repositories of web crawl data and has become an important source of training and research data for the broader AI ecosystem. Whether or not a particular AI model uses Common Crawl directly, the project has become a useful proxy for a larger question: Can machines discover and access the information organizations publish online?

That is precisely why the AI Visibility Audit caught my attention.

What happens after the content is discovered?

That question came into focus while reviewing schema implementations across several banking websites. On the surface, most appeared reasonably mature. The sites contained Organization markup, BankOrCreditUnion entities, branch information, product schema, service schema, and many of the components one would expect to see at large financial institutions.

However, when I stopped looking at individual pages and started looking at the relationships between entities, a very different picture emerged. I found most banks had a fundamental schema, but very few had built out a knowledge graph.

The Difference Between Describing A Page And Describing A Business

One recurring theme in the SEO industry is the importance of schema completeness. We audit whether required properties are present. We validate markup against Google’s tools. We look for missing fields and opportunities to expand coverage.

The problem is that most of these exercises evaluate pages in isolation.  A branch page is reviewed as such. A product page is reviewed as a product page. A service page is reviewed as such. What often gets overlooked is whether those entities are meaningfully connected.

In the banking examples I reviewed, it was common to find a branch location, a checking account, a mortgage offering, and a corporate organization all marked up separately. What was frequently missing was the connective tissue that explained how those entities related to one another.

  • Which legal entity owned the consumer-facing brand?
  • Which products were offered through which services?
  • Which services were available at which branches?
  • Which offerings were available only in specific markets or jurisdictions?
  • Which products belonged to a larger family of financial solutions?

The markup described the individual pieces, but it rarely described the business itself.

That distinction may seem subtle, but it becomes increasingly important as search engines and AI systems move beyond page-level understanding toward entity-level understanding.

The Validator Problem

Part of the issue may stem from how we evaluate structured data. Most validation tools perform a single-page review. They determine whether a page contains the expected properties for a given schema type and whether those properties conform to accepted standards.

This approach works reasonably well when the objective is to generate a rich result or to validate a standalone entity. It becomes less effective when the objective is building a connected knowledge graph.

One of the more frustrating aspects of implementing sophisticated schema architectures is that the very mechanisms designed to create entity relationships often appear incomplete when viewed through page-level validation tools.

The contradiction becomes particularly apparent when organizations attempt to implement graph-based architectures as Google recommends. A branch page may reference its parent organization through an @id relationship that points to the organization’s primary entity definition on the homepage. The organization’s address, legal information, social profiles, and other core attributes are stored in the graph, but not necessarily on the page being tested.

Ironically, some of the same implementations Google recommends for entity alignment can generate warnings in page-level testing tools because the information is intentionally referenced elsewhere rather than duplicated. In effect, organizations are encouraged to build graphs while still being evaluated as though every page were an island.

That distinction may have mattered little during the rich snippet era, when the primary objective was determining whether a single page contained enough information to qualify for a search feature. It becomes increasingly important as search engines, knowledge systems, and AI platforms seek to understand how entities relate to one another across an entire organization.

Google’s Evolution Reveals The Real Direction

Today, many of Google’s most significant investments appear focused on relationships and context. Product Graph, Merchant Center feeds, compatibility data, variant relationships, entity reconciliation, and Conversational Attributes all point in a similar direction. Collectively, these initiatives suggest that understanding relationships between entities has become increasingly important, particularly when those relationships are difficult to infer consistently from content alone.

Google’s actions suggest that relationship inference remains challenging even for one of the world’s most sophisticated information retrieval systems. Otherwise, there would be little reason to continue expanding the mechanisms through which organizations can explicitly provide contextual information about products, services, brands, and audiences.

Common Crawl Measures Visibility. Relationships Determine Understanding

This brings us back to Common Crawl.

The AI Visibility Audit addresses an important challenge. Organizations should absolutely understand whether AI systems can access their content. Content that cannot be discovered cannot influence search results, AI-generated answers, or recommendation systems.

Visibility matters. However, visibility and understanding are not the same thing. In many ways, Common Crawl is asking the same question SEO teams have asked for decades: Can machines reach the content?

The emerging AI challenge is what happens after machines gain access to the content. A crawler can successfully discover every page on a website and still struggle to understand how the underlying entities connect. Historically, search engines attempted to infer those relationships from content, links, user behavior, and countless other signals. In many cases, they became remarkably good at it. Yet Google’s recent investments suggest that inference has limits.

Consider the recent introduction of Conversational Attributes in Merchant Center. Rather than relying solely on AI systems to determine which products solve similar problems, which products are alternatives, or which attributes matter in specific situations, Google is increasingly asking merchants to provide that context directly.

Google clearly possesses the resources, data, and AI capabilities to make educated guesses about product relationships. Nevertheless, it continues to seek information directly from the organizations that manufacture, sell, and support those products.

The reason is simple. Inference can be powerful, but first-party knowledge is often more accurate.

A manufacturer knows which products are compatible. A retailer knows which products are commonly purchased together. A bank knows which services are available at which branches. A global company knows which product variations apply in specific markets.

While AI systems can attempt to reconstruct those relationships from content, organizations already possess the answers. The question, therefore, is not whether AI can infer relationships. The more important question is whether the organizations that own those relationships can and would provide a reliable way for machines to understand them.

That distinction becomes increasingly important as AI systems move beyond retrieving information and begin synthesizing, recommending, and acting upon it. The information may already exist somewhere on the website, but the contextual relationships that give it meaning are often left for machines to discover on their own.

Are We Ready For The Agentic Hype Machine?

Over the past year, the industry has become increasingly focused on concepts such as MCP, WebMCP, agent skills, agent cards, API catalogs, A2A protocols, and llms.txt files. Much of the discussion assumes that the web is rapidly evolving toward an agent-first ecosystem.

Recent Agentic Readiness research by Bastian Grimm offers a useful reality check. After benchmarking highly visible websites across the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany, he found that adoption of these agent-oriented standards remains remarkably limited. The overwhelming majority of sites exposed none of the agent-discovery mechanisms currently being promoted by the industry.

That finding does not suggest the agent-ready web is unimportant, but suggests we may be getting ahead of ourselves. More importantly, even if every major website deployed llms.txt, WebMCP manifests, and API catalogs tomorrow, the same underlying challenge would remain.

What information are those systems exposing?

A machine-readable doorway is valuable only if it leads to accurate, connected, and contextually complete information. If the underlying relationships between products, brands, locations, services, and markets are poorly modeled, agentic access simply makes incomplete information easier to retrieve.

The access layer is not the hard part. The relationship layer is.

Beyond Entity Graphs: Introducing The Integrity Graph

Most discussions around structured data focus on building an Entity Graph to help machines understand the company, product, location, and how they are connected to each other. Those capabilities are important. However, AI systems face a more difficult challenge. They must determine which facts apply within which contexts. This is where I believe organizations need to begin thinking about what I call an Integrity Graph.

An Integrity Graph extends beyond entity identification to preserve contextual truth.

It helps establish which legal entity owns a brand, which products belong to a product family, which services are available in specific markets, which branches offer particular services, which regulations apply in particular jurisdictions, and which information is globally applicable versus locally relevant.

Simply identifying entities is no longer enough. Organizations must preserve the integrity of their relationships.

What Organizations Should Audit Next

The growing number of AI readiness audits highlights how quickly the conversation is evolving. Common Crawl’s AI Visibility Audit focuses on discoverability and accessibility. Bastian Grimm’s benchmark for agent-ready technologies assesses whether websites provide machine-readable interfaces that agents can discover and interact with. Dixon Jones and the team at Waikay approach the challenge from yet another angle, Brand AI Visibility Audit, evaluating whether AI systems can recognize brands, understand entities, and accurately associate an organization with the topics, products, and concepts it seeks to own.

Viewed collectively, these emerging audit frameworks reveal that the industry is evaluating several distinct layers of machine understanding.

Common Crawl focuses on visibility and accessibility by asking whether machines can discover and access the content.

Agentic readiness frameworks examine whether agents can discover capabilities and interact with systems.

Entity visibility assessments assess whether AI systems can correctly identify brands, organizations, and the concepts associated with them.

Relationship integrity focuses on a different question entirely: whether machines understand how the organization itself operates.

Each layer builds upon the one before it. Content must be discoverable before it can be accessed. It must be accessible before it can be associated with an entity. It must be associated with an entity before machines can accurately understand the relationships that give the information meaning.

Why This Matters For Global Organizations

The importance of relationship integrity becomes even more obvious when viewed through an international lens.

A multinational company may have content available in twenty markets. Common Crawl can successfully discover all of it. AI systems can retrieve it. Search engines can index it. The visibility problem is solved.

For years, international SEO focused on helping search engines show the correct page to the correct user. AI systems introduce a different challenge. Now we must help machines understand the correct facts for the correct audience, market, and context.

We must ensure clarity on which product information applies in Germany, which regulations apply in Japan, and which services are available in Canada. Often, an equally complex challenge is which local brand names map to the same global product, and which facts are globally true and which are market-specific? These are not crawling and retrievability problems but data integrity problems.

In many ways, the next generation of international SEO may resemble hreflang at the knowledge level rather than at the URL level. The challenge is no longer simply routing users to the correct page. The challenge is ensuring machines understand the correct version of the truth.

The Next Competitive Advantage

The banking analysis that inspired this article illustrates the issue well. Most of the institutions had no shortage of schema. Their websites contained thousands of lines of structured data and numerous schema types. What they lacked was a coherent representation of how the business itself operated. That focus makes sense because discoverability remains a prerequisite for participation. However, discoverability alone will not be enough.

The organizations that thrive in the next phase of search may not be those with the most schema markup, the most pages, or the most AI-ready endpoints. They may be the organizations that provide the clearest, most complete, and most trustworthy representation of how their entities, products, services, locations, brands, and markets relate to one another. The next challenge is determining whether machines understand how the business actually works.

That shift may ultimately prove more important than any individual schema property, API endpoint, or AI optimization tactic. As search engines and AI systems become increasingly capable of retrieving information, the competitive advantage will move toward organizations that can provide context, preserve relationships, and maintain the integrity of their knowledge.

Understanding an entity is only the beginning. Understanding how that entity relates to everything around it is where the real value lies.

More Resources:


Featured Image: Roman Samborskyi/Shutterstock

Research Suggests AI Engines Assign Ranking Roles To Sources via @sejournal, @martinibuster

BrightEdge research comparing citations in ChatGPT and Google AI Overviews suggests that AI search engines are doing more than retrieving information. They are assigning different roles to the same sources, treating platforms like Reddit and LinkedIn as authoritative references in some contexts and as social commentary in others.

For SEOs, publishers, and business owners, the findings suggest that AI visibility is becoming less about simply appearing in citations and more about understanding how each AI system interprets a source.

AI Search Engines Are Not Using The Same Sources The Same Way

The most important finding in the research is that the same source can be treated very differently depending on which AI engine is generating the answer.

Reddit’s AI Citation Patterns

  • Reddit appears alongside editorial and reference sites such as Mayo Clinic, Healthline, Cleveland Clinic, and Britannica roughly 36% of the time in ChatGPT citations.
  • In Google AI Overviews, those authority sites appear next to Reddit only about 6% of the time.
  • Google AI Overviews more frequently groups Reddit with social platforms.
  • YouTube appears alongside Reddit in approximately 36% of AI Overviews citations.
  • Facebook, TikTok, and Instagram also commonly appear in the same citation environment.

The result is what BrightEdge describes as a “6x authority flip.” The same Reddit thread occupies two different positions depending on the AI system evaluating it.

This is a significant distinction for marketers because optimization depends on the niche.

A citation is not simply a citation. The surrounding sources provide context about how an AI system interprets the information.

👉 When Reddit appears next to Mayo Clinic and Healthline, it is functioning more like an authority source.

👉 When it appears beside YouTube, TikTok, and Instagram, it is functioning more like social proof or crowd opinion.

AI engines are making editorial judgments about sources that influence whether or not to retrieve them.

Different AI Engines Assign Different Jobs To The Same Platforms

The differences extend beyond credibility.

BrightEdge’s analysis found that ChatGPT and Google AI Overviews also rely on Reddit and LinkedIn for different types of questions.

How-To And Explanation Queries

  • Reddit “How To” Citations: Reddit is cited about twice as often in ChatGPT as in AI Overviews.
  • LinkedIn “How To” Citations: LinkedIn is cited 33% in ChatGPT and 22% in AI Overviews.
  • Explanation Queries: ChatGPT relies more heavily on Reddit for answering “why does this happen?” questions.

Google AI Overviews relies on social sources differently for comparison-style queries. Approximately 10% of its social citations appear in comparison-style prompts such as “X vs. Y,” compared with only about 1% in ChatGPT.

That difference may reveal something about how the two systems construct answers.

👉 ChatGPT appears more willing to synthesize comparisons directly.

👉 Google AI Overviews appears more likely to surface discussions where users are already debating competing options.

Verification questions show another distinction. These account for roughly 14% to 24% of prompts across both engines, but the sources serving those answers differ. LinkedIn tends to appear for professional capability questions, while Reddit is more frequently used for consumer reassurance and experience-based validation.

The split between LinkedIn and Reddit is another signal that AI systems may be assigning sources to specific types of answers. LinkedIn earns citations in professional, career, and B2B contexts. Reddit earns them in broader consumer contexts, especially health, money, and product research in ChatGPT.

The findings suggest that AI systems are not merely selecting sources. They are assigning sources specific jobs within the answer-generation process.

AI Citation Strategy Now Requires Platform-Specific Optimization

The practical implication is that AI search can no longer be treated as a single channel.

For years, search marketers generally focused on achieving visibility within one ranking system. AI search introduces a more complicated environment where the same content may carry different weight depending on which engine is evaluating it.

👉 A strong Reddit discussion may function as an authority signal in ChatGPT while serving primarily as community sentiment in AI Overviews.

👉 LinkedIn may be valuable for professional how-to content and capability questions but less useful for consumer-oriented discussions.

This means marketers may need to think less about where they are mentioned and more about what role those mentions play.

The BrightEdge data indicates that citations are increasingly tied to editorial judgments. Platforms appear to be earning visibility because they answer particular categories of questions, not simply because they have strong brand recognition.

That has implications for content strategy, digital PR, community participation, and brand building.

The goal is no longer just to earn mentions across the web. It is to earn links or mentions from the type of content that AI systems associate with the questions businesses want to answer.

What The Research Suggests About AI Search

The most interesting finding is not that ChatGPT and Google AI Overviews cite Reddit and LinkedIn differently.

It is that both systems appear to be developing their own way of deciding what different sources represent, assigning them roles.

Role Assignments

  • Reddit is used as authority in some contexts.
  • Reddit is used as social proof in other contexts.
  • Reddit is used for “how to” guidance in ChatGPT.
  • Reddit is used for comparison discussions in AI Overviews.
  • LinkedIn is used for professional capability checks across both AI engines.
  • LinkedIn is used for professional, career, and B2B questions across both AI engines.

Traditional search engines ranked pages based on relevance for multiple search intents. AI engines increasingly appear to classify sources, assign them roles, and then use them according to the function they serve within an answer.

That is the marketing insight hiding in plain sight. The Reddit and LinkedIn statistics are the evidence supporting that broader conclusion. If that trend continues, understanding how AI systems interpret a source may become just as important as understanding whether they cite it at all.

Read the original research here:

Same Users, Same Jobs, Different Doors: How Organic and AI Search Cover the Same Job Universe

Featured Image by Shutterstock/Nzr Maz