Digital Ads Cost 19% More, Convert Less: User Frustration To Blame via @sejournal, @MattGSouthern

New data shows what many marketers already suspect: it’s getting harder and more expensive to convert online visitors.

A study of 90 billion sessions shows organic traffic is down from last year, pushing more brands toward paid channels to make up the difference.

This information comes from Contentsquare’s Digital Experience Benchmark Report, which examines changes in traffic patterns and highlights growing user frustrations.

Key Trends Shaping Today’s Digital Experience

1. Increasing Traffic Costs

Global website traffic dropped by 3.3% year-over-year (YoY), forcing brands to depend more on paid ads.

Paid sources now account for 39% of all traffic, a 5.6% increase. Organic and direct traffic fell by 5.7%.

With digital ad spending rising by 13.2%, the average cost per visit increased by 9% compared to last year and by 19% over two years.

2. New Visitors Leave Quickly

User engagement metrics are declining globally, with overall consumption (like time spent, page views, and scroll depth) falling by 6.5%.

New visitors viewed 1.8% fewer pages YoY, while returning visitors had a slight increase (+0.5%).

Most sessions that started on product detail pages (PDPs) ended immediately, underscoring the risk of overly transactional landing pages.

3. Frustration Hurts Retention

“Rage” clicks (clicking a page element at least three times in less than 2 seconds) and slow load times affected one in three visits and reduced session depth by 6%.

Sites that addressed these frustrations had 18% higher retention rates than their competitors.

4. Conversion Rates Decline

Global conversion rates fell by 6.1%, worsened by the lower yield of paid traffic (1.83% compared to 2.66% for unpaid traffic).

High-performing brands countered this trend by enhancing engagement: sites that improved session depth saw a 5.4% rise in conversions, while others faced a 13.1% drop.

5. Retention Starts On-Site

Despite a 7% YoY drop in 30-day retention, returning visits grew by 1.9%, driven by paid ads (+5.6%YoY).

Sites with strong retention had 17% fewer rage clicks and 18% more page views per visit, showing that smooth experiences lead to customer loyalty.

What This Means For Marketers

Here are some actionable insights for digital teams:

  • Diversify Traffic Strategies: Explore new channels, like retail media networks, to reduce dependence on unstable paid ads.
  • Improve New Visitor Journeys: Use heatmaps and personalized content to lower early exits.
  • Address Frustration Proactively: Implement real-time monitoring to tackle rage clicks and slow load times.
  • Leverage Analytics: Use behavioral data to identify high-intent visitors and improve their pathways.

Methodology

Contentsquare’s report analyzed 90 billion sessions, 389 billion page views, and 6,000 global websites from Q4 2023 to Q4 2024. The metrics covered various sectors, including retail, travel, and financial services.


Featured Image: robuart/Shutterstock

2025 Marketing Trends: The End Of SEO? [Webinar] via @sejournal, @hethr_campbell

Finding it tough to keep up with AI’s impact on location marketing?

You’re not alone.

AI is reshaping location marketing, and now there’s a new buzzword in town: GEO (Generative Engine Optimization).

As search evolves, it’s crucial to stay ahead of the trends and ensure your strategy aligns with how AI and search engines process location-based content.

Join us for our upcoming webinar on February 13, 2025, 2025 Marketing Trends: The End Of SEO? where we’ll demystify the latest trends and give you actionable insights to drive results in 2025.

Why This Webinar Is A Must-Attend Event

We’ll cover everything you need to elevate your location marketing strategy.

In this webinar, you’ll get:

  • The latest AI-powered tools and tech shaping the industry
  • 5 reasons why GEO should be your new go-to SEO tactic
  • How to balance authenticity with AI-driven marketing
  • Emerging trends and their impact on Location Performance Optimization (LPO) and your Location Performance Score (LPS)

Why This Webinar Is A Must-Attend Event

This session is packed with real-world tips to help you craft high-impact, ROI-driven strategies for 2025—because even superheroes need the right tools to navigate the future.

Live Q&A: Get Your Questions Answered

Stick around for an interactive Q&A, where we’ll answer your biggest questions about AI, GEO, and the future of location marketing.

Secure Your Spot Today!

Can’t make it live? No worries—register anyway, and we’ll send you the recording.

Get ready to supercharge your location marketing strategy. See you there!

Consistency Vs. Agility: Finding Balance In Search Marketing via @sejournal, @coreydmorris

“How is search changing and how do you react to that change?”

This was a question in the prep notes for a podcast interview recently.  It’s one that, I think, justifies a longer response than what I can give in just a minute or two on that show.

Long before AI became the most newsworthy and important focal point for the future of search marketing, there were other significant updates over the years.

These include “not provided” keyword data, voice search, drastic changes in SERP page layouts, debates over what correlation versus causation is with how social influences rankings, and myriad Google Ads ad type changes. As a result, we have been a distracted industry.

I could go on and on with examples of distractions, debates, half-truths, and things we could/should test. I’m not here to show my age, though, or try to prove anything.

What I do believe, and have experienced firsthand, is that distractions are real, and they will keep coming at us.

There’s a lot of pressure to have a strategy and plan and stick to it to be able to see results and return on investment (ROI) for SEO and PPC.

However, there’s always the threat of getting behind on updates and new technology, and having the things that work for us today stop working tomorrow.

For so many of us in the search marketing industry, this constant of change and the fact that there isn’t one way to “assembly line” the work makes it exciting and keeps it fresh.

At times, though, we can feel like we’re constantly behind new developments or that we’re chasing things with no understanding of whether they will deliver ROI or not.

I’m unpacking the benefits of balancing both consistency – sticking to what works today and your plan – along with agility to be forward-thinking and to be able to pivot when things change and update your strategy.

The Case For Consistency

In SEO, we often focus on the long game. Taking an approach that includes short-term tactics and actions that we know and trust will pay off in the longer term.

Outside of the noise and distractions of new tech and algorithms, some of our biggest challenges can be staying focused and seeing SEO efforts all the way through.

In small organizations or teams, we might wear a lot of hats, with SEO being just one of them.

In larger organizations, even in SEO teams, we often face bigger processes, including more stakeholders, approvals, compliance, legal, politics, or other teams we depend on to help implement.

In either type, or even a middle-ground scenario, some of the biggest challenges are in being able to implement and stay focused on SEO to see it through to results.

That often leads to the desire to use systems, checklists, and resources that allow us to push through to ROI.

It is very important not to get distracted, off-course, or delay the implementation of today’s tactics as it can painfully push further out the fruit of the efforts or to see the strategy through to the desired results.

The Case For Agility

On the other hand, when it comes to consistency, with the biggest constant in search being distraction or change, we have to have agile processes and strategies that lend to adjustments in tactics.

While we must maintain a base level of consistency and focus, blindly doing something without paying attention to outside factors like algorithm changes, emerging technologies, changes in consumer behavior, or changes in the competitive landscape can lead to a lot of effort.

When you get further down the road, it can equal a lot of time, effort, and/or dollars spent without the desired ROI.

If you’ve been doing search for a while, you can typically spot outdated approaches and tactics being done by other brands or agencies.

It is critically important to stay current with what works today and where the future is going.

Whether that is a fragmented world that includes optimizing for being found in AI results alongside search engines or further emerging challenges with attribution of our efforts, we have to keep testing, researching, learning from others in the community, and refining our own approaches to apply to our strategy and tactics.

Agility has always been important in search, and it is heightened even more right now.

Finding Balance

I believe the key to being a successful search marketer or seeing ROI in your investment, efforts, and resources for SEO and PPC in this era is to have a balanced approach. One where consistency is non-negotiable and where you have a system with agility built into it.

I find myself often saying that we have to both focus on what works today and not get lost chasing shiny objects of AI and things of tomorrow.

At the same time, we can’t bury our heads in the sand and ignore what is to come tomorrow so that we don’t get left behind and become outdated in our approach.

Ways that I have found helpful to navigate all of this include having structured testing, learning, and research built into your strategy – allowing necessary room to test and to adapt and adjust.

Whether you tend to spend time on what’s next and the future or push it off and do what matters today, you have to find what works for you.

AI task forces in organizations are a great way to build accountability across teams to push some to innovate and test while also reining in others and making sure you don’t lose focus.

Your strategy, approach, and system must be consistent, and it must also leave room to adapt to the rapidly changing landscape of both organic and paid search ecosystems and channels.

Adapting To What’s Next In Search

I have talked in the past about the dangers of “checklist SEO” or just following best practices. Yes, following a checklist and being dedicated to it does help with consistency.

But, the current and future challenges facing both paid and organic search are less about the tactics and more about how we can do what works now and be able to adapt and implement what works in the future.

Personally, I’m good with the search world revolving a little less around Google and being more fragmented. Yes, it will require work to be a leader in the search industry of tomorrow.

However, I’d rather be part of where it is going than leave the industry, as I know some people personally are looking to do in the near future.

Are you up for the challenge? If so, I strongly recommend that you find your own balance and I’m in your corner as we tackle what is to come.

More Resources:


Featured Image: SvetaZi/Shutterstock

15 Interview Questions To Ask Your Next Digital Marketer Candidates via @sejournal, @brookeosmundson

Hiring the right digital marketer can make or break your marketing team.

With new tools, platforms, and regulations cropping up constantly, you’re not just looking for someone who “gets PPC” or can crank out social media posts.

You need a pro who can adapt to change, think strategically, and roll with the punches when things don’t go as planned (because they rarely do).

Whether you’re at an agency or in-house managing a marketing department, hiring for digital marketing roles today means going beyond surface-level questions.

It’s about diving deeper to understand how candidates think, problem-solve, and approach their craft in a way that aligns with your business goals.

Sometimes, the “why” behind these questions is more important than the question itself.

Here are 15 crucial interview questions to help you hire your next digital marketing rockstar.

Tactical Knowledge Questions

The first set of questions focuses on an individual’s tactical knowledge of digital marketing.

1. How Do You Use AI And Automation To Improve Your Campaigns?

AI and automation aren’t just buzzwords anymore. They’re tools shaping how marketers work.

This question uncovers whether the candidate is using these tools for better performance or simply riding the hype wave.

  • What to listen for: Candidates should provide specific examples, such as using AI for bid adjustments in PPC or helping analyze campaign data for better optimizations. Red flags include vague responses or over-reliance on automation without understanding its impact.

2. What’s Your Approach To Building And Refining Audience Segments For Targeted Campaigns?

Audience targeting has become more nuanced, and it’s a skill you can’t skip.

This question dives into their strategy for reaching the right people at the right time.

  • What to listen for: Specific techniques like combining customer relationship management (CRM) data with platform insights or testing lookalike audiences. Be wary of candidates who rely solely on pre-set audience templates without customization.

3. What Platforms Are Your Favorite To Work In, And Why?

Asking this question helps understand the individual’s strengths in certain channels, and where they could use room to grow.

  • What to listen for: A great digital marketer should be able to comfortably work across platforms and different tools. This is true whether you’re talking about hiring someone for PPC or SEO, or even a cross-channel marketer.

4. How Do You Leverage First-Party Data To Inform Your Campaigns?

First-party data is becoming increasingly valuable as the reliance on third-party cookies still remains questionable. This question uncovers how a candidate adapts to this shift of having a privacy-first mindset.

  • What to listen for: A candidate may talk about strategies like email segmentation, loyalty programs, or even how they’ve approached capturing first-party data to ensure they’re able to properly use them in campaigns. A potential red flag is relying on outdated cookie-based methods without a backup plan.

5. Can You Share An Example Of Using Cross-Platform Advertising That Has Driven Results?

As digital marketers, we know most campaigns aren’t “one and done” on a single platform. Candidates need to show how they think holistically about digital ecosystems.

  • What to listen for: Strong examples include integrating Google Ads with Meta campaigns or leveraging TikTok for awareness and retargeting on a different platform. A red flag is a candidate focusing only on one platform without considering how they interconnect and inform each other.

6. What’s Your Experience With Data Visualization Tools, And How Do You Present Campaign Performance To Stakeholders?

Explaining results is just as important as achieving them. This question gets into their communication skills and ability to tell a story with data.

  • What to listen for: Candidates should mention the use of different tools like Looker Studio and explain how they tailor reports to different audiences. Watch out for overly technical explanations that might confuse stakeholders.

Strategic Knowledge Questions

It’s not only important to know how to do the job, but also to know why you’re doing what you’re doing.

The next set of questions allows you to dive deeper into the candidate’s mindset and see if they can put the strategic pieces together for clients.

7. How Do You Stay On Top Of Industry Changes, And What’s Something You’ve Learned Recently That Impacted Your Work?

The digital landscape changes every single day.

If someone isn’t staying current with best practices and platform changes, it can be detrimental to client success. You need to have someone on the team who is fully aware of any changes in the industry that could impact performance.

  • What to listen for: Understanding what methods a candidate uses to stay “in the know” is important. If a candidate says they’re too busy to set aside time to read up on trends, I’d consider that a red flag.

8. Have You Had To Pivot A Campaign Due To Changing Data Privacy Regulations?

Data privacy laws have changed the name of the game, especially in PPC.

This question tests how the candidate navigates regulations while keeping campaigns effective and compliant.

  • What to listen for: Look for examples like shifting to first-party data or adjusting targeting strategies in light of GDPR or CCPA. Red flags include ignoring compliance issues or struggling to adapt when audience data becomes restricted.

9. How Do You Measure Success Across Different Types Of Campaigns?

Success isn’t one-size-fits-all. The answer should show how they align goals, metrics, and performance analysis for various strategies.

  • What to listen for: Candidates should mention setting specific KPI goals based on the channel and objective of a campaign. Be wary of those who rely on vanity metrics like impressions without tying them to business outcomes.

10. How Do You Explain Complex Answers To A Client Or Someone In A C-Suite Role?

This will inevitably happen in any digital marketing role. It’s easy when you’re working as a team, and everyone knows the ins and outs of acronyms, in the weeds content.

Sometimes, you need to explain something like you’re talking to a third grader. Less is more.

  • Green flags to listen for:
    • Candidates who know how to navigate their language based on the role of the person they’re talking to.
    • When a candidate has the knowledge of basic business questions that the role cares about.
    • They know how to explain the “why” behind performance peaks and valleys.
  • Red flags to listen for:
    • Does the candidate dance around this question?
    • Is this candidate someone who might have difficulty thinking on their feet?
    • Do they believe in sharing too much data in order to avoid questions?

Culture & Fit Questions

This last set of questions is really looking at the long-term impact of your digital marketing hire.

You’re not looking to hire temporarily; you’re hiring for the long haul.

You want to feel confident in your candidate selection based on their character, the ability to collaborate with others (teams and clients), and, of course, the empathy factor.

11. What Is Your Management Style, And How Do You Ensure Alignment Within A Team?

Leadership and collaboration are critical in marketing roles.

This question helps asses how their approach complements your team dynamics.

  • Green flags to listen for: Strong candidates will mention fostering open communication, using clear goal-setting frameworks, or adapting their style to individual team members.
  • Red flags to listen for: If you notice any micro-management tendencies or when the candidate avoids conflict resolution.

12. How Do You Balance Working Independently With Collaborating Across Departments?

Similar to the question above, digital marketers often juggle solo tasks with cross-functional initiatives.

Everyone performs their duties well in different scenarios. In some cases, digital marketers are required to work alone, on a team, or both.

This question highlights their adaptability to working together as a team versus in a silo.

  • What to listen for: Examples of successfully managing independent projects while aligning with other team departments. Be cautious of candidates who struggle to collaborate, communicate, or prefer working in silos.

13. Can You Describe A Time You Contributed To Maintaining A Positive Team Culture?

A strong company culture is key to retention and productivity.

This question reveals how they value and influence workplace dynamics.

  • What to listen for: Specific instances where they recognized a fellow colleague, facilitated team bonding, or helped resolve conflicts. Avoid candidates who dismiss culture-building as unimportant.

14. How Do You Handle Constructive Feedback, Both Giving And Receiving It?

Feedback is essential for any type of growth. This question assesses their ability to engage in productive conversations.

  • What to listen for: Look for examples of accepting feedback gracefully, acting on it, and offering constructive criticism thoughtfully. Red flags include defensiveness or avoiding difficult conversations.

15. What Are You Looking For In This Role?

Personally, I used to cringe at this question. Now, I find myself asking this to anyone I interview.

Bringing in a new person to an organization costs a lot of time and money. Think of all the training that goes into a new hire, the staffing that’s required to help train and mentor them, etc.

  • What to listen for: If they don’t have a clear answer, that’s a potential red flag. Are they simply looking for a stepping-stone position? While there’s nothing wrong with that, it’s better to know upfront to align expectations for both parties.

At the end of the day, do their motives fit in with your company’s culture and values? If not, they likely aren’t the right candidate.

Wrapping It Up

Hiring the right digital marketer isn’t just about finding someone with a great resume.

It’s about finding someone who fits with your team, aligns with your company goals, and has the skills to thrive in an ever-changing space.

Use these questions to dig deeper and uncover candidates who have the mix of experience, adaptability, and strategic thinking you need for this year and beyond.

Because let’s face it: You’re not just hiring for today’s challenges – you’re hiring for tomorrow’s opportunities.

More Resources:


Featured Image: insta_photos/Shutterstock

Matt Mullenweg Expects WP Engine Dispute Resolution Soon via @sejournal, @martinibuster

Matt Mullenweg downplayed his dispute with WP Engine, saying it’s not as big a deal as people are making it out to be and shared that he believes it will all be over in a few months.

Matt Compares Himself To Standing Up To Bullies

The podcast host expressed surprise at how harshly Matt went after WP Engine, expressing that he never figured Matt to be the kind of person who would go after someone else so hard, that it didn’t seem to fit his idea of the kind of person Matt Mullenweg was in his mind. Matt responded that he thought that was kind of funny because he’s actually that guy.

The podcast host commented:

“I’ve read a lot about Matt’s work. I don’t know Matt and I’ve listened to him, he doesn’t seem like someone who would ever like insult someone and I was actually surprised that you were going as hard as you were. And I guess your perspective is like, they’re coming after everything I made or they don’t contribute, whatever. But I was actually surprised that you were you you were pissed off and I didn’t think that you would be the type of guy that would come off pissed off…”

Matt smiled as he explained that he feels obliged to stand up for WordPress, like someone standing up to a playground bully.

He explained:

“…so just like a schoolyard bully, you kind of have to stand up for yourself. So it’s kind of funny because you say you don’t think of me as doing this but actually if you look at the history of WordPress there have been maybe four or five times in the history where I had this kind of villain arc … like we had a fight to protect our principles and the sustainability and the future of WordPress.”

Matt Says People Will Forget About WP Engine Dispute

Matt compared the current dispute with WP Engine with previous controversies as a way to note how those were forgotten and one day the WP Engine conflict will also be forgotten.

Mullenweg continued:

“You know, some of these previous controversies that got mainstream media coverage, you know CNN, I had this Hot Nacho scandal in the first couple years of WordPress or the Thesis fight or the Easter Massacre of themes, like all these things I’m mentioning you probably haven’t heard of.

It used to be like half my Wikipedia page, now it’s not. Today if you go to my Wikipedia page, their PR firm has a whole paragraph about this.

I think in 5 years maybe it’ll be a sentence or not even on there at all.”

Mullenweg Downplays WP Engine Dispute

Matt sought to portray WP Engine as not that big a company and ultimately people are making a bigger deal about the dispute than it actually is.

He said:

“And they’re a web host which people think is the largest but actually you know probably the sixth or seventh largest WordPress web host. There’s a lot of bigger ones and they’re a single digit percentage of all the WordPresses in the world. They probably have like 700,000 800,000 or something.

People have made this into a bigger deal than it really is.”

Mullenweg Expects Fight To Be Over In Months

Lastly, Mullenweg expressed the opinion that it was his duty to stand up and fight and that he expected the WP Engine dispute to be behind him within a few months although he did acknowledge that there are many angry people.

The characterization that the dispute will be over within a few months is startling because it seems to suggest that there is something going on behind the scenes or that he would simply prevail and get his way. Mullenweg didn’t explain what he meant by that comment and the podcast hosts didn’t ask him to elaborate.

Mullenweg said,

“So it’s not my first rodeo. Sometimes you have to fight to protect your open source ideals and the community and and your trademark.

By the way, I expect this to resolve in the next few months. Although it’s easy to find like, if you go on Reddit or Twitter, I get a lot of hate.”

At this point Matt explained the conflict from his point of view, painting himself as the victim who was forced to go on the attack, narrating a sequence of events that generally isn’t how most people experienced it. He painted WP Engine’s side as the aggressor and characterized the public rebuke he gave of WP Engine at WordCamp as a “presentation.”

Mullenweg explained:

“Some of the people are uncomfortable with you know us having to to fight protect ourselves. You know WP Engine took some, a very aggressive legal action. So it turned out when we thought we were sort of good faith negotiating they were preparing a legal case to attack us because you know 3 days after I give this presentation they launched this huge lawsuit with Quinn Emanuel it’s kind of like the one of the biggest nastiest law firms.”

Where Were The Hard Questions?

One of the podcast hosts solicited the WordPress communities on Reddit and Twitter for questions that he could ask Matt Mullenweg. The community responded with many questions but the podcast hosts largely refrained from asking those user submitted questions, which to be fair were pretty hard-hitting and inherently presupposed things about Mullenweg.

Watch the podcast interview:

Featured Image by Shutterstock/supercaps

5 Content Marketing Ideas for March 2025

Content such as articles, videos, and podcasts can be the building blocks of modern consumer engagement. Content drives direct traffic, search engine rankings, social media, and AI tools.

In March 2025, ecommerce content marketers could focus on sustainability, compliments, baseball, agricultural heritage, and a spring cleaning challenge.

Go Green

Marketers can use the green of St. Patrick’s Day to focus on sustainability.

While March often brings thoughts of St. Patrick’s Day shamrocks and emerald hues, ecommerce businesses can expand the “green” theme to highlight sustainability practices and eco-friendly products.

A marketer can transform a playful holiday into meaningful content that resonates with conservation-conscious consumers.

Consider publishing blog posts or videos describing your business’s efforts to consume less and conserve more.

  • A beauty supply brand could showcase its transition to plastic-free packaging.
  • A direct-to-consumer outdoor gear company might detail its use of recycled materials.
  • A home goods store could demonstrate how it has reduced shipping waste.
  • A fashion retailer might explain its clothing recycling program.

The content becomes even better with metrics and achievements. Share actual numbers about the use of recycled materials or less packaging. These details help shoppers understand the real impact of their purchasing decisions.

A shop could create content that encourages sustainable practices, such as:

  • A kitchenware store could publish guides about reducing food waste.
  • An electronics retailer might offer tips for extending a device’s life.
  • A garden supply company could create content about water conservation.
  • A home decor business could share upcycling ideas for its products.

World Compliment Day

World Compliment Day is an opportunity to recognize customers, employees, and suppliers.

March 1, 2025, is World Compliment Day, an opportunity to create uplifting and entertaining content.

Unlike many commercial observances focusing on gift-giving, World Compliment Day celebrates the power of sincere appreciation — perfect for authentic engagement.

I see four angles a content marketer could take:

  • Customer appreciation. Short-form videos or blog posts on “what we love about our customers.”
  • Employee appreciation. Profile key personnel and tell the brand’s story from their perspective.
  • Supplier appreciation. Recognize top suppliers in blog posts or podcasts. Mr. Porter, the men’s fashion shop, used to run articles featuring quality inventory vendors.
  • Encourage compliments. Run social campaigns as part of a contest or discount to encourage customers to compliment others.

Spring Training

Photo of a baseball player in uniform

Spring training is an American baseball tradition, but “training” can apply to everyone.

Major League Baseball spring training in North America starts in February and runs through March 25. Teams head to Arizona, California, and Florida to prepare for the regular season.

Ecommerce businesses can tap into the nostalgic and hopeful spirit of baseball’s preseason. The annual tradition marks more than just the return of America’s pastime – it represents renewal, preparation, and the anticipation of warmer days ahead.

Content marketers could take a few angles with spring training, including a “Spring Training for Everyone” theme. The idea is to apply “spring training” to a shop’s customers and products.

  • Fitness retailers could create “Spring Training for Everyone” workout guides.
  • Kitchen supply shops could have “Spring Training Recipes” focused on nutrition and weight loss.
  • Outdoor furniture sellers could offer “Spring Patio” content.
  • Garden supply stores might publish “Spring Planting Guides.”

National Agriculture Day

Photo of a male farmer in a field of crops.

National Agriculture Day celebrates farming and food production.

National Agriculture Day falls on March 18, 2025, and celebrates the vital role of food production in our daily lives.

Farm supply retailers have a clear connection, but almost any business can create content aligning its products to agricultural heritage and sustainable food systems.

Here are a few example blog post titles:

  • Kitchen accessories shop: “The Chef’s Guide to Seasonal Produce”
  • DTC workwear brand: “How Farm Life Shaped Modern Fashion”
  • Pet supply retailer: “From Farm to Bowl: Understanding Pet Food Sources”
  • Travel merchant: “Top Farm Tourist Destinations for 2025”

Remember, the goal of content marketing is to entice shoppers to visit your website, engage with your brand, and ultimately become loyal customers. Never hesitate to connect your products to the topic.

Spring Cleaning Challenge

Photo of a male washing a classic Ford Mustang

Spring cleaning may take many forms, from cleaning a home to washing a car.

My fifth content marketing idea for March 2025 is a “Spring Cleaning Challenge,” an integrated campaign of multichannel content that drives engagement while naturally showcasing products.

The approach combines education, social proof, and community building:

  • Create a 14- or 30-day cleaning and organization program,
  • Release daily or weekly task videos,
  • Offer downloadable checklists and planning guides,
  • Include before and after photos for social sharing,
  • Provide expert tips and sustainable cleaning methods,
  • Offer rewards or discounts for the folks participating.

The idea applies to many businesses since “spring cleaning” could be a house, a vehicle, or a contractor’s power tools.

How measuring vaccine hesitancy could help health professionals tackle it

This article first appeared in The Checkup, MIT Technology Review’s weekly biotech newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Thursday, and read articles like this first, sign up here.

This week, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the US’s health agencies, has been facing questions from senators as part of his confirmation hearing for the role. So far, it’s been a dramatic watch, with plenty of fiery exchanges, screams from audience members, and damaging revelations.

There’s also been a lot of discussion about vaccines. Kennedy has long been a vocal critic of vaccines. He has spread misinformation about the effects of vaccines. He’s petitioned the government to revoke the approval of vaccines. He’s sued pharmaceutical companies that make vaccines

Kennedy has his supporters. But not everyone who opts not to vaccinate shares his worldview. There are lots of reasons why people don’t vaccinate themselves or their children.

Understanding those reasons will help us tackle an issue considered to be a huge global health problem today. And plenty of researchers are working on tools to do just that.

Jonathan Kantor is one of them. Kantor, who is jointly affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia and the University of Oxford in the UK, has been developing a scale to measure and assess “vaccine hesitancy.”

That term is what best captures the diverse thoughts and opinions held by people who don’t get vaccinated, says Kantor. “We used to tend more toward [calling] someone … a vaccine refuser or denier,” he says. But while some people under this umbrella will be stridently opposed to vaccines for various reasons, not all of them will be. Some may be unsure or ambivalent. Some might have specific fears, perhaps about side effects or even about needle injections.

Vaccine hesitancy is shared by “a very heterogeneous group,” says Kantor. That group includes “everyone from those who have a little bit of wariness … and want a little bit more information … to those who are strongly opposed and feel that it is their mission in life to spread the gospel regarding the risks of vaccination.”

To begin understanding where individuals sit on this spectrum and why, Kantor and his colleagues scoured published research on vaccine hesitancy. They sent surveys to 50 people, asking them detailed questions about their feelings on vaccines. The researchers were looking for themes: Which issues kept cropping up?

They found that prominent concerns about vaccines tend to fall into three categories: beliefs, pain, and deliberation. Beliefs might be along the lines of “It is unhealthy for children to be vaccinated as much as they are today.” Concerns around pain center more on the immediate consequences of the vaccination, such as fears about the injection. And deliberation refers to the need some people feel to “do their own research.”

Kantor and his colleagues used their findings to develop a 13-question survey, which they trialed in 500 people from the UK and 500 more from the US. They found that responses to the questionnaire could predict whether someone had been vaccinated against covid-19.

Theirs is not the first vaccine hesitancy scale out there—similar questionnaires have been developed by others, often focusing on parents’ feelings about their children’s vaccinations. But Kantor says this is the first to incorporate the theme of deliberation—a concept that seems to have become more popular during the early days of covid-19 vaccination rollouts.

Nicole Vike at the University of Cincinnati and her colleagues are taking a different approach. They say research has suggested that how people feel about risks and rewards seems to influence whether they get vaccinated (although not necessarily in a simple or direct manner).

Vike’s team surveyed over 4,000 people to better understand this link, asking them information about themselves and how they felt about a series of pictures of sports, nature scenes, cute and aggressive animals, and so on. Using machine learning, they built a model that could predict, from these results, whether a person would be likely to get vaccinated against covid-19.

This survey could be easily distributed to thousands of people and is subtle enough that people taking it might not realize it is gathering information about their vaccine choices, Vike and her colleagues wrote in a paper describing their research. And the information collected could help public health centers understand where there is demand for vaccines, and conversely, where outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases might be more likely.

Models like these could be helpful in combating vaccine hesitancy, says Ashlesha Kaushik, vice president of the Iowa Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics. The information could enable health agencies to deliver tailored information and support to specific communities that share similar concerns, she says.

Kantor, who is a practicing physician, hopes his questionnaire could offer doctors and other health professionals insight into their patients’ concerns and suggest ways to address them. It isn’t always practical for doctors to sit down with their patients for lengthy, in-depth discussions about the merits and shortfalls of vaccines. But if a patient can spend a few minutes filling out a questionnaire before the appointment, the doctor will have a starting point for steering a respectful and fruitful conversation about the subject.

When it comes to vaccine hesitancy, we need all the insight we can get. Vaccines prevent millions of deaths every year. One and half million children under the age of five die every year from vaccine-preventable diseases, according to the children’s charity UNICEF. In 2019, the World Health Organization included “vaccine hesitancy” on its list of 10 threats to global health.

When vaccination rates drop, we start to see outbreaks of the diseases the vaccines protect against. We’ve seen this a lot recently with measles, which is incredibly infectious. Sixteen measles outbreaks were reported in the US in 2024.

Globally, over 22 million children missed their first dose of the measles vaccine in 2023, and measles cases rose by 20%. Over 107,000 people around the world died from measles that year, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Most of them were children.

Vaccine hesitancy is dangerous. “It’s really creating a threatening environment for these vaccine-preventable diseases to make a comeback,” says Kaushik. 

Kantor agrees: “Anything we can do to help mitigate that, I think, is great.”


Now read the rest of The Checkup

Read more from MIT Technology Review‘s archive

In 2021, my former colleague Tanya Basu wrote a guide to having discussions about vaccines with people who are hesitant. Kindness and nonjudgmentalism will get you far, she wrote.

In December 2020, as covid-19 ran rampant around the world, doctors took to social media platforms like TikTok to allay fears around the vaccine. Sharing their personal experiences was important—but not without risk, A.W. Ohlheiser reported at the time.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is currently in the spotlight for his views on vaccines. But he has also spread harmful misinformation about HIV and AIDS, as Anna Merlan reported.

mRNA vaccines have played a vital role in the covid-19 pandemic, and in 2023, the researchers who pioneered the science behind them were awarded a Nobel Prize. Here’s what’s next for mRNA vaccines.

Vaccines are estimated to have averted 154 million deaths in the last 50 years. That number includes 146 million children under the age of five. That’s partly why childhood vaccines are a public health success story.

From around the web

As Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Senate hearing continued this week, so did the revelations of his misguided beliefs about health and vaccines. Kennedy, who has called himself “an expert on vaccines,” said in 2021 that “we should not be giving Black people the same vaccine schedule that’s given to whites, because their immune system is better than ours”—a claim that is not supported by evidence. (The Washington Post)

And in past email exchanges with his niece, a primary-care physician at NYC Health + Hospitals in New York City, RFK Jr. made repeated false claims about covid-19 vaccinations and questioned the value of annual flu vaccinations. (STAT)

Towana Looney, who became the third person to receive a gene-edited pig kidney in December, is still healthy and full of energy two months later. The milestone makes Looney the longest-living recipient of a pig organ transplant. “I’m superwoman,” she told the Associated Press. (AP)

The Trump administration’s attempt to freeze trillions of dollars in federal grants, loans, and other financial assistance programs was chaotic. Even a pause in funding for global health programs can be considered a destruction, writes Atul Gawande. (The New Yorker)

How ultraprocessed is the food in your diet? This chart can help rank food items—but won’t tell you all you need to know about how healthy they are. (Scientific American)

The Download: measuring vaccine hesitancy, and the rise of DeepSeek

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.

How measuring vaccine hesitancy could help health professionals tackle it

This week, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the US’s health agencies, has been facing questions from senators as part of his confirmation hearing for the role. So far, it’s been a dramatic watch, with plenty of fiery exchanges, screams from audience members, and damaging revelations.

There’s also been a lot of discussion about vaccines. Kennedy has long been a vocal critic of vaccines. He has spread misinformation about the effects of vaccines. He’s petitioned the government to revoke the approval of vaccines. He’s sued pharmaceutical companies that make vaccines.

Kennedy has his supporters. But not everyone who opts not to vaccinate shares his worldview. There are lots of reasons why people don’t vaccinate themselves or their children. Understanding those reasons will help us tackle an issue considered to be a huge global health problem today. And plenty of researchers are working on tools to do just that. Read the full story.

—Jessica Hamzelou

This article first appeared in The Checkup, MIT Technology Review’s weekly biotech newsletter. To receive it in your inbox every Thursday, and read articles like this first, sign up here.

What DeepSeek’s breakout success means for AI

The tech world is abuzz over a new open-source reasoning AI model developed by DeepSeek, a Chinese startup. The company claims that this new model, called DeepSeek R1, matches or even surpasses OpenAI’s ChatGPT o1 in performance but operates at a fraction of the cost.

Its success is even more remarkable given the constraints that Chinese AI companies face due to US export controls on cutting-edge chips. DeepSeek’s approach represents a radical change in how AI gets built, and could shift the tech world’s center of gravity.

Join news editor Charlotte Jee, senior AI editor Will Douglas Heaven, and China reporter Caiwei Chen for an exclusive subscriber-only Roundtable conversation on Monday 3 February at 12pm ET discussing what DeepSeek’s breakout success means for AI and the broader tech industry. Register here.

The must-reads

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

1 Federal workers are being forced to defend their work to Elon Musk’s acolytes
Government tech staff are being pulled into sudden meetings with students. (Wired $)
+ Archivists are rushing to save thousands of datasets being yanked offline. (404 Media)
+ Civil servants aren’t buying Musk’s promises. (Slate $)

2 The US Copyright Office says AI-assisted art can be copyrighted 
But works wholly created by AI can’t be. (AP News)
+ The AI lab waging a guerrilla war over exploitative AI. (MIT Technology Review)

3 OpenAI is partnering with US National Laboratories
Its models will be used for scientific research and nuclear weapons security. (NBC News)
+ It’s the latest move from the firm to curry favor with the US government. (Engadget)
+ OpenAI has upped its lobbying efforts nearly sevenfold. (MIT Technology Review)

4 DeepSeek’s success is inspiring founders in Africa
The startup has proved that frugality can go hand in hand with innovation. (Rest of World)
+ What Africa needs to do to become a major AI player. (MIT Technology Review)

5 China is building a massive wartime command center
The complex appears to be part of preparation for the possibility of nuclear war. (FT $)
+ Pentagon workers used DeepSeek’s chatbot for days before it was blocked. (Bloomberg $)
+ We saw a demo of the new AI system powering Anduril’s vision for war. (MIT Technology Review)

6 There’s a chance this colossal asteroid will hit Earth in 2032
Experts aren’t too worried—yet. (The Guardian)
+ How worried should we be about the end of the world? (New Yorker $)
+ Earth is probably safe from a killer asteroid for 1,000 years. (MIT Technology Review)

7 Things are looking up for Europe’s leading battery maker
Truckmaker Scania is now supporting the troubled Northvolt’s day-to-day operations. (Reuters)
+ Three takeaways about the current state of batteries. (MIT Technology Review)

8 This group of Luddite teens is still resisting technology
But three years after starting their club, the lure of dating apps is strong. (NYT $)

9 Reddit’s bastion of humanity is under threat
AI features are creeping into the forum, much to users’ chagrin. (The Atlantic $)

10 Bid a fond farewell to MiniDiscs and blank Blu-Rays
Sony is finally pulling the plug on some of its recordable media formats. (IEEE Spectrum)

Quote of the day

“We try to be really open and then everything I say leaks. It sucks.”

—Mark Zuckerberg warns that leakers will be fired in a memo that was promptly leaked, the Verge reports.

The big story

This artist is dominating AI-generated art. And he’s not happy about it.

September 2022

Greg Rutkowski is a Polish digital artist who uses classical styles to create dreamy landscapes. His distinctive style has been used in some of the world’s most popular fantasy games, including Dungeons and Dragons and Magic: The Gathering.

Now he’s become a hit in the new world of text-to-image AI generation. His name is one of the most commonly used prompts in the open-source AI art generator Stable Diffusion.

But this and other open-source programs are built by scraping images from the internet, often without permission and proper attribution to artists. And artists like Rutkowski have had enough. Read the full story.

—Melissa Heikkilä

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 or skeet ’em at me.)

+ It’s an oldie but a goodie: ice dancing gold medalists Tessa Virtue and Scott Moir’s routine to Moulin Rouge is simply spectacular.
+ This week marks 56 years since the Beatles performed their last ever gig on the roof of their Apple headquarters.
+ In other Beatles news, Ringo Starr has never eaten a pizza.
+ The Video Game History Foundation has opened up its incredible archive (thanks Dani!)

How DeepSeek ripped up the AI playbook—and why everyone’s going to follow its lead

Join us on Monday, February 3 as our editors discuss what DeepSeek’s breakout success means for AI and the broader tech industry. Register for this special subscriber-only session today.

When the Chinese firm DeepSeek dropped a large language model called R1 last week, it sent shock waves through the US tech industry. Not only did R1 match the best of the homegrown competition, it was built for a fraction of the cost—and given away for free. 

The US stock market lost $1 trillion, President Trump called it a wake-up call, and the hype was dialed up yet again. “DeepSeek R1 is one of the most amazing and impressive breakthroughs I’ve ever seen—and as open source, a profound gift to the world,” Silicon Valley’s kingpin investor Marc Andreessen posted on X.

But DeepSeek’s innovations are not the only takeaway here. By publishing details about how R1 and a previous model called V3 were built and releasing the models for free, DeepSeek has pulled back the curtain to reveal that reasoning models are a lot easier to build than people thought. The company has closed the lead on the world’s very top labs.

The news kicked competitors everywhere into gear. This week, the Chinese tech giant Alibaba announced a new version of its large language model Qwen and the Allen Institute for AI (AI2), a top US nonprofit lab, announced an update to its large language model Tulu. Both claim that their latest models beat DeepSeek’s equivalent.

Sam Altman, cofounder and CEO of OpenAI, called R1 impressive—for the price—but hit back with a bullish promise: “We will obviously deliver much better models.” OpenAI then pushed out ChatGPT Gov, a version of its chatbot tailored to the security needs of US government agencies, in an apparent nod to concerns that DeepSeek’s app was sending data to China. There’s more to come.

DeepSeek has suddenly become the company to beat. What exactly did it do to rattle the tech world so fully? Is the hype justified? And what can we learn from the buzz about what’s coming next? Here’s what you need to know.  

Training steps

Let’s start by unpacking how large language models are trained. There are two main stages, known as pretraining and post-training. Pretraining is the stage most people talk about. In this process, billions of documents—huge numbers of websites, books, code repositories, and more—are fed into a neural network over and over again until it learns to generate text that looks like its source material, one word at a time. What you end up with is known as a base model.

Pretraining is where most of the work happens, and it can cost huge amounts of money. But as Andrej Karpathy, a cofounder of OpenAI and former head of AI at Tesla, noted in a talk at Microsoft Build last year: “Base models are not assistants. They just want to complete internet documents.”

Turning a large language model into a useful tool takes a number of extra steps. This is the post-training stage, where the model learns to do specific tasks like answer questions (or answer questions step by step, as with OpenAI’s o3 and DeepSeek’s R1). The way this has been done for the last few years is to take a base model and train it to mimic examples of question-answer pairs provided by armies of human testers. This step is known as supervised fine-tuning. 

OpenAI then pioneered yet another step, in which sample answers from the model are scored—again by human testers—and those scores used to train the model to produce future answers more like those that score well and less like those that don’t. This technique, known as reinforcement learning with human feedback (RLHF), is what makes chatbots like ChatGPT so slick. RLHF is now used across the industry.

But those post-training steps take time. What DeepSeek has shown is that you can get the same results without using people at all—at least most of the time. DeepSeek replaces supervised fine-tuning and RLHF with a reinforcement-learning step that is fully automated. Instead of using human feedback to steer its models, the firm uses feedback scores produced by a computer.

“Skipping or cutting down on human feedback—that’s a big thing,” says Itamar Friedman, a former research director at Alibaba and now cofounder and CEO of Qodo, an AI coding startup based in Israel. “You’re almost completely training models without humans needing to do the labor.”

Cheap labor

The downside of this approach is that computers are good at scoring answers to questions about math and code but not very good at scoring answers to open-ended or more subjective questions. That’s why R1 performs especially well on math and code tests. To train its models to answer a wider range of non-math questions or perform creative tasks, DeepSeek still has to ask people to provide the feedback. 

But even that is cheaper in China. “Relative to Western markets, the cost to create high-quality data is lower in China and there is a larger talent pool with university qualifications in math, programming, or engineering fields,” says Si Chen, a vice president at the Australian AI firm Appen and a former head of strategy at both Amazon Web Services China and the Chinese tech giant Tencent. 

DeepSeek used this approach to build a base model, called V3, that rivals OpenAI’s flagship model GPT-4o. The firm released V3 a month ago. Last week’s R1, the new model that matches OpenAI’s o1, was built on top of V3. 

To build R1, DeepSeek took V3 and ran its reinforcement-learning loop over and over again. In 2016 Google DeepMind showed that this kind of automated trial-and-error approach, with no human input, could take a board-game-playing model that made random moves and train it to beat grand masters. DeepSeek does something similar with large language models: Potential answers are treated as possible moves in a game. 

To start with, the model did not produce answers that worked through a question step by step, as DeepSeek wanted. But by scoring the model’s sample answers automatically, the training process nudged it bit by bit toward the desired behavior. 

Eventually, DeepSeek produced a model that performed well on a number of benchmarks. But this model, called R1-Zero, gave answers that were hard to read and were written in a mix of multiple languages. To give it one last tweak, DeepSeek seeded the reinforcement-learning process with a small data set of example responses provided by people. Training R1-Zero on those produced the model that DeepSeek named R1. 

There’s more. To make its use of reinforcement learning as efficient as possible, DeepSeek has also developed a new algorithm called Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). It first used GRPO a year ago, to build a model called DeepSeekMath. 

We’ll skip the details—you just need to know that reinforcement learning involves calculating a score to determine whether a potential move is good or bad. Many existing reinforcement-learning techniques require a whole separate model to make this calculation. In the case of large language models, that means a second model that could be as expensive to build and run as the first. Instead of using a second model to predict a score, GRPO just makes an educated guess. It’s cheap, but still accurate enough to work.  

A common approach

DeepSeek’s use of reinforcement learning is the main innovation that the company describes in its R1 paper. But DeepSeek is not the only firm experimenting with this technique. Two weeks before R1 dropped, a team at Microsoft Asia announced a model called rStar-Math, which was trained in a similar way. “It has similarly huge leaps in performance,” says Matt Zeiler, founder and CEO of the AI firm Clarifai.

AI2’s Tulu was also built using efficient reinforcement-learning techniques (but on top of, not instead of, human-led steps like supervised fine-tuning and RLHF). And the US firm Hugging Face is racing to replicate R1 with OpenR1, a clone of DeepSeek’s model that Hugging Face hopes will expose even more of the ingredients in R1’s special sauce.

What’s more, it’s an open secret that top firms like OpenAI, Google DeepMind, and Anthropic may already be using their own versions of DeepSeek’s approach to train their new generation of models. “I’m sure they’re doing almost the exact same thing, but they’ll have their own flavor of it,” says Zeiler. 

But DeepSeek has more than one trick up its sleeve. It trained its base model V3 to do something called multi-token prediction, where the model learns to predict a string of words at once instead of one at a time. This training is cheaper and turns out to boost accuracy as well. “If you think about how you speak, when you’re halfway through a sentence, you know what the rest of the sentence is going to be,” says Zeiler. “These models should be capable of that too.”  

It has also found cheaper ways to create large data sets. To train last year’s model, DeepSeekMath, it took a free data set called Common Crawl—a huge number of documents scraped from the internet—and used an automated process to extract just the documents that included math problems. This was far cheaper than building a new data set of math problems by hand. It was also more effective: Common Crawl includes a lot more math than any other specialist math data set that’s available. 

And on the hardware side, DeepSeek has found new ways to juice old chips, allowing it to train top-tier models without coughing up for the latest hardware on the market. Half their innovation comes from straight engineering, says Zeiler: “They definitely have some really, really good GPU engineers on that team.”

Nvidia provides software called CUDA that engineers use to tweak the settings of their chips. But DeepSeek bypassed this code using assembler, a programming language that talks to the hardware itself, to go far beyond what Nvidia offers out of the box. “That’s as hardcore as it gets in optimizing these things,” says Zeiler. “You can do it, but basically it’s so difficult that nobody does.”

DeepSeek’s string of innovations on multiple models is impressive. But it also shows that the firm’s claim to have spent less than $6 million to train V3 is not the whole story. R1 and V3 were built on a stack of existing tech. “Maybe the very last step—the last click of the button—cost them $6 million, but the research that led up to that probably cost 10 times as much, if not more,” says Friedman. And in a blog post that cut through a lot of the hype, Anthropic cofounder and CEO Dario Amodei pointed out that DeepSeek probably has around $1 billion worth of chips, an estimate based on reports that the firm in fact used 50,000 Nvidia H100 GPUs

A new paradigm

But why now? There are hundreds of startups around the world trying to build the next big thing. Why have we seen a string of reasoning models like OpenAI’s o1 and o3, Google DeepMind’s Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking, and now R1 appear within weeks of each other? 

The answer is that the base models—GPT-4o, Gemini 2.0, V3—are all now good enough to have reasoning-like behavior coaxed out of them. “What R1 shows is that with a strong enough base model, reinforcement learning is sufficient to elicit reasoning from a language model without any human supervision,” says Lewis Tunstall, a scientist at Hugging Face.

In other words, top US firms may have figured out how to do it but were keeping quiet. “It seems that there’s a clever way of taking your base model, your pretrained model, and turning it into a much more capable reasoning model,” says Zeiler. “And up to this point, the procedure that was required for converting a pretrained model into a reasoning model wasn’t well known. It wasn’t public.”

What’s different about R1 is that DeepSeek published how they did it. “And it turns out that it’s not that expensive a process,” says Zeiler. “The hard part is getting that pretrained model in the first place.” As Karpathy revealed at Microsoft Build last year, pretraining a model represents 99% of the work and most of the cost. 

If building reasoning models is not as hard as people thought, we can expect a proliferation of free models that are far more capable than we’ve yet seen. With the know-how out in the open, Friedman thinks, there will be more collaboration between small companies, blunting the edge that the biggest companies have enjoyed. “I think this could be a monumental moment,” he says. 

OpenAI releases its new o3-mini reasoning model for free

On Thursday, Microsoft announced that it’s rolling OpenAI’s reasoning model o1 out to its Copilot users, and now OpenAI is releasing a new reasoning model, o3-mini, to people who use the free version of ChatGPT. This will mark the first time that the vast majority of people will have access to one of OpenAI’s reasoning models, which were formerly restricted to its paid Pro and Plus bundles.

Reasoning models use a “chain of thought” technique to generate responses, essentially working through a problem presented to the model step by step. Using this method, the model can find mistakes in its process and correct them before giving an answer. This typically results in more thorough and accurate responses, but it also causes the models to pause before answering, sometimes leading to lengthy wait times. OpenAI claims that o3-mini responds 24% faster than o1-mini.

These types of models are most effective at solving complex problems, so if you have any PhD-level math problems you’re cracking away at, you can try them out. Alternatively, if you’ve had issues with getting previous models to respond properly to your most advanced prompts, you may want to try out this new reasoning model on them. To try out o3-mini, simply select “Reason” when you start a new prompt on ChatGPT

Although reasoning models possess new capabilities, they come at a cost. OpenAI’s o1-mini is 20 times more expensive to run than its equivalent non-reasoning model, GPT-4o mini. The company says its new model, o3-mini, costs 63% less than o1-mini per input token However, at $1.10 per million input tokens, it is still about seven times more expensive to run than GPT-4o mini.

This new model is coming right after the DeepSeek release that shook the AI world less than two weeks ago. DeepSeek’s new model performs just as well as top OpenAI models, but the Chinese company claims it cost roughly $6 million to train, as opposed to the estimated cost of over $100 million for training OpenAI’s GPT-4. (It’s worth noting that a lot of people are interrogating this claim.) 

Additionally, DeepSeek’s reasoning model costs $0.55 per million input tokens, half the price of o3-mini, so OpenAI still has a way to go to bring down its costs. It’s estimated that reasoning models also have much higher energy costs than other types, given the larger number of computations they require to produce an answer.

This new wave of reasoning models present new safety challenges as well. OpenAI used a technique called deliberative alignment to train its o-series models, basically having them reference OpenAI’s internal policies at each step of its reasoning to make sure they weren’t ignoring any rules.

But the company has found that o3-mini, like the o1 model, is significantly better than non-reasoning models at jailbreaking and “challenging safety evaluations”—essentially, it’s much harder to control a reasoning model given its advanced capabilities. o3-mini is the first model to score as “medium risk” on model autonomy, a rating given because it’s better than previous models at specific coding tasks—indicating “greater potential for self-improvement and AI research acceleration,” according to OpenAI. That said, the model is still bad at real-world research. If it were better at that, it would be rated as high risk, and OpenAI would restrict the model’s release.