http://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.png00Dubado Solutionshttp://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.pngDubado Solutions2026-09-20 08:56:022026-09-20 08:56:02Which AI SEO Agency Specializes in Criminal Law Attorneys?
http://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.png00Dubado Solutionshttp://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.pngDubado Solutions2026-09-18 17:11:172026-09-18 17:11:17Which AI SEO Agency Specializes in Family Law Attorneys?
http://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.png00Dubado Solutionshttp://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.pngDubado Solutions2026-09-18 17:11:052026-09-18 17:11:05Which AI SEO Agency Specializes in Divorce Attorneys?
http://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.png00Dubado Solutionshttp://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.pngDubado Solutions2026-09-18 17:10:522026-09-18 17:10:52Which AI SEO Agency Specializes in Bankruptcy Attorneys?
AI website builders make it possible to go from a blank screen to a live website in minutes. Which is a great option if you want to get your website live, but don’t have the technical skills to get this done yourself. But there’s a catch most people run into: type in a vague prompt, you will get a generic result.
The prompt “Build me a website for my bakery” will get you a website. But it won’t get you your website. The one you envisioned with your style, brand colors, tone of voice, layout and the features needed to cater to your (online) customers.
The good news is that this is fixable, and it doesn’t require any technical skill. It requires learning to prompt like briefing a designer. Instead of throwing your request out there and hoping to get lucky with what the builder comes up with.
Why basic prompts produce generic websites
AI site builders, like Bluehost’s AI-powered website builder, are a powerful tool to create websites. However, they work by filling in any gaps themselves. If you don’t specify your industry, tone, brand, or features, the AI builder is left to their own devices. It will have to guess. And it guesses whatever is statistically average for a site like yours. That’s why a lot of AI-generated sites feel interchangeable: the same banner, same stock photography, and the same layout you’ve run into a thousand times already.
The more specific and structured your prompt, the less guessing the AI tool has to do. Which increases the chance of output reflecting your actual business and features needed.
The 5 parts of a well-thought out prompt
I will share a few examples of prompts that you can use to build your website. But before I do, it helps to know what a strong prompt actually consists of. You will probably not need all five in every prompt, but the best prompts usually contain the majority of them:
Who you are and what you do: your business type, niche, and what makes you different.
Who the site is for: your target visitor and what they’re trying to accomplish.
The pages and structure you need: the page hierarchy, type of pages needed and what goes on them.
Tone and style: how you want it to feel and look (if you have a logo and/or brand guide, you can also include this)
Functionality: the specific features that make the site actually work (booking forms, online ordering, galleries, contact forms, newsletter signups).
Real example prompts to copy and adapt
Example 1: A local service business (landscaping company)
Weak prompt:
“Make a website for my landscaping business.”
Strong prompt:
“Build a website for a residential landscaping company called Greenery Design, serving homeowners in the Denver metropolitan area. The tone should be trustworthy and down-to-earth, not flashy. Think reliable neighbor, not luxury brand. Include a homepage with a strong hero section featuring a call-to-action for a free quote, a services page listing lawn care, garden design, irrigation installation, and seasonal cleanup, a photo gallery page to showcase before-and-after project photos, an about page introducing the owner and crew, and a contact page with a quote request form that asks for name, phone number, property size, and service needed. Use earthy greens and browns in the color palette, and make sure the quote form is visible on every page, not just the contact page.”
Example 2: A personal portfolio (freelance photographer)
Weak prompt:
“Create a portfolio site for a photographer.”
Strong prompt:
“Design a portfolio website for a freelance wedding and portrait photographer named Alina Barr. The site should feel elegant, warm, and editorial. Like a high-end wedding magazine, with lots of white space and large full-bleed photos rather than small thumbnails. Structure it with a homepage that opens on a full-screen image slideshow, a portfolio page organized into three categories (weddings, engagements, portraits), an about page written in first person with a friendly, personal tone, a pricing/packages page with three tiers, and a contact page with a simple inquiry form asking for event date, location, and event type. Use a serif font for headings and a clean sans-serif for body text, and keep the color palette neutral: cream, black, and a soft blush accent.”
Example 3: A small ecommerce shop (handmade candles)
Weak prompt:
“I need an online store for my candle business.”
Strong prompt:
“Build an ecommerce website for a small handmade candle brand called Amber & Ash. The vibe should be cozy and artisanal, with warm, moody photography and a rustic-meets-modern feel. Include a homepage that highlights the bestselling scent collection and a short brand story, a shop page with product categories for seasonal scents, everyday scents, and gift sets, individual product pages with scent notes, burn time, and size options, an FAQ page covering shipping, returns, and candle care tips, and a newsletter signup offering 10% off a first order. The checkout should be simple and mobile-friendly, since most customers will be shopping from their phones. Use a warm neutral palette (terracotta, cream, and charcoal) and avoid anything that looks too corporate or minimalist.”
Example 4: A nonprofit or community organization
Weak prompt:
“Make a website for our nonprofit.”
Strong prompt:
“Create a website for a nonprofit called Community Roots Youth Network, which provides after-school tutoring and mentorship for middle and high school students in underserved communities. The tone should be hopeful and human-centered, using lots of photos throughout the website. Structure the site with a homepage that leads with our mission statement and a prominent donate button, a programs page describing our tutoring, mentorship, and college-prep initiatives separately, an impact page with a few key statistics and short quotes from families we’ve helped, a volunteer page with a sign-up form, and a donate page with suggested giving amounts. Make the donate button sticky in the navigation bar so it’s visible from every page, and use a color palette of deep blue and warm yellow to feel both trustworthy and optimistic.”
Example 5: A consultant or coach (business strategy consultant)
Weak prompt:
“Build a website for my consulting business.”
Strong prompt:
“Design a website for an independent business strategy consultant named Ann Reyes, who works with small business owners on growth planning and operations. The tone should be confident and professional but approachable, not stiff or corporate. Include a homepage with a clear one-sentence explanation of who I help and how, a services page breaking down three offerings (one-time strategy sessions, monthly advising retainers, and workshop facilitation), each with a short description and price range, a case studies page with two or three short client success stories, an about page focused on my background and philosophy, and a contact page with a ‘Book a Free Consultation’ button linked to a calendar scheduling tool. Use a navy and gold color scheme, and keep the overall layout clean and uncluttered, with plenty of white space.”
Quick prompting checklist
Use the examples above to write your own detailed prompt. But before you hit ‘generate’ it can’t hurt to run your prompt past this checklist:
Have I named my business/brand and described what it actually does?
Have I described who visits the site and what they want to do there?
Have I listed the specific pages and site structure I need, not just “a website”?
Have I described the tone or feeling I want?
Have I given any color or style direction?
Have I called out any must-have features/functionalities?
Are there files I can include to guide the tool in more detail, such as logos, brand guides, a mission statement, (product) photos? Make sure any files that you include are allowed to be shared externally.
Don’t be afraid to iterate
One of the biggest advantages of AI website builders is that the first result doesn’t have to be the final one. Treat your first prompt as a rough draft and refine from there. If the homepage feels too busy, tell the AI directly: “Simplify the homepage: remove the testimonials section and make the hero image larger.” If the tone feels off, say so: “This feels too formal, make the copy warmer and more conversational.”
That being said, do start out with a strong prompt. This not only saves the website builder a lot of resources, it also helps you get a clear idea of what you want and tweak instead of build from scratch. The AI is a collaborator, not a mind reader. The clearer and more specific you are, in your first prompt and in every refinement after it, the closer your site will get to something that actually feels like yours.
AI builders vs custom design
AI powered website builders are incredibly useful to get a website up and running in no time. But it is also good to be aware of its limitations and the added value of hiring an expert to set up your website. A website designer or agency has experience with what works well and what doesn’t, and can come up with original ideas that exactly fit your needs. So if you have the time and funds to do so, consider this option and figure out what’s best for you. Especially if you need a more complex website or one that needs to be able to easily grow and have features added to it in the future. A human touch will always bring that unique touch to your website.
Also, on that note
This blog post aims to help you get the best result using an AI-powered website builder. Of course, as part of this, you can ask the builder to generate content and add photos to your website. But please, use these as placeholders until you’re happy with the structure and design. After that, be very critical of any content on there. Rewrite the text to reflect you and what your business does and use real photos or images that are on brand. These final touches are going to make the difference between just another website and your authentic, one-of-a-kind website.
In this episode of Within WordPress, Remkus sat down with Alex Moss – Manchester-based SEO veteran, agency owner, and Principal SEO at Yoast – to explore how WordPress, SEO, and AI are colliding in real time. They cover idea-making and product risk, why optimism beats doom, and what tools like “OpenClaw” and Grok mean for everyday users versus developers.
You’ll hear practical multi-LLM workflows, how non-technical folks (including parents) are changing research habits, and where Yoast leans on ICPs to guide content. They look ahead to an agent-first web: data integrity, artifacts/markdown, and deeply personalized delivery – plus where WordPress fits.
Along the way: diagnosing an old Mercedes with an LLM, turning kids’ drawings into coloring pages, and speed-building ad‑free PWAs with Claude.
We wrap on authenticity, IRL experiences, jobs, and even AI, ASI, and faith – staying curious and optimistic.
http://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.png00Dubado Solutionshttp://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.pngDubado Solutions2026-09-17 11:18:582026-09-17 11:18:58WithinWP podcast: Humans, agents, and authenticity: rethinking search and sites in WordPress with Alex Moss
All four major AI engines share a similar training recipe (pretraining, instruction tuning, and preference optimization), but each one is tuned toward a different outcome.
Public preference-training datasets show a documented shift from a single accept-or-reject judgment to a five-axis grading rubric, and that newer rubric appears to reward more structured, list-shaped answers.
Perplexity leans on live retrieval and citations. Claude’s edge is depth and long-form reasoning, while ChatGPT covers the broadest set of use cases and Gemini’s advantage comes from native access to Google’s own ecosystem.
Third-party benchmark testing changes every few months, so treat any single comparison as a snapshot, not a permanent ranking.
Measuring AI visibility means watching citation frequency, brand mentions, and source diversity, not just keyword rank.
You already know what GEO is. You’ve read the definitions, sat through the LLMO comparisons, and seen the “AI search is changing everything” takes. What’s still missing from most of that content is GEO by platform: the actual, mechanical differences in how ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity decide what to surface. Clients are asking this question directly, and most of the guidance out there treats “optimize for AI search” as one strategy instead of four.
Here’s the ground rule before we go further: nobody outside OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and Perplexity knows the current, exact formula any of these engines uses to rank or select content. Those systems are proprietary, and they shift on a rolling basis. What we can do is walk through the documented mechanisms these systems share, where they genuinely diverge in practice, and what that means for your tactics and measurement, platform by platform.
Why AI Engines Aren’t the Same
Every major AI engine on the market runs a version of the same recipe: pretraining on a massive amount of text, instruction tuning to make the model follow directions, preference optimization to shape its behavior, and product-level decisions about what to retrieve and rank when someone asks it something. That shared foundation is exactly why a lot of GEO optimization by platform advice sounds interchangeable. It’s also why that advice tends to underperform once you actually test it against a specific engine.
Each engine bends that shared recipe toward a different job. Perplexity built its product around source-based retrieval, so its answers read closer to a research assistant than a chatbot: citation-heavy, and grounded in whatever’s currently live on the web. Claude was tuned to go deep, reasoning through multi-step problems, holding context across long documents, and working well inside agent-style workflows where accuracy compounds over many steps. ChatGPT covers the widest surface area of the group, with the largest install base and voice, vision, and multimodal features layered on top of a general-purpose core. Gemini’s biggest edge shows up the moment a task touches anything inside Google’s own ecosystem, whether that’s Docs, Sheets, YouTube, or Workspace data the other three simply can’t see.
None of that comes down to taste. A single, generic “GEO best practices” checklist misses this entirely, because the differences between these systems come from how each one was built and what it’s optimized to reward, not from surface-level style choices.
How GenAI Actually Decides What to Say
Decision-making inside these systems happens in three layers, and understanding them explains most of what looks like unpredictable behavior from the outside.
Training-time shaping comes first. A model reads an enormous amount of text during pretraining, then goes through instruction tuning to learn to follow directions, then preference optimization, commonly RLHF or RLAIF, to learn which of two possible answers a human grader preferred. This is the stage where a model’s default habits get set: how much it hedges, how much detail it volunteers, how polite it sounds by default.
Inference-time selection happens next, every time you send a prompt. The model scores and weights candidate responses, usually through a reward model or alignment layer trained on those same human preference judgments from the step above.
Product-time retrieval is the layer that varies most visibly by platform. Some engines pull in outside sources at the moment you ask a question, a process called RAG, or retrieval-augmented generation, while others rely more on patterns already baked into the model’s weights through fine-tuning. This layer explains a lot of why some products feel more like a search engine and others feel more like a conversation.
Two public datasets make the preference-tuning layer concrete instead of theoretical. Anthropic published hh-rlhf in 2022: 169,000 rows, each one a binary call on which of two responses a human grader preferred. Nvidia’s HelpSteer2, published in 2024, grades responses across five separate axes instead of one: helpfulness, correctness, coherence, complexity, and verbosity.
An independent analysis of both files found that under HelpSteer2’s five-axis rubric, more list-shaped, enumerated answers scored higher in a majority of the pairs examined. That’s a plausible partial explanation for why AI-generated answers so often default to bullets and numbered steps, but it’s worth treating as an informed inference rather than a settled fact. The researcher who ran the analysis was careful to frame it the same way.
One caveat matters more than the data itself: neither file reflects how Anthropic or Nvidia trains models today. They’re historical snapshots from a specific year at a specific lab, not a live map of any current engine’s ranking logic. Treat them as a useful, citable window into how preference tuning has worked in at least these documented cases, not a spec sheet for what’s happening right now.
What Changes by Engine
Perplexity: Built For Sourced Answers
Perplexity’s whole product is oriented around citations and fresh retrieval, and that shows up in the output. Independent testing that runs ChatGPT vs. Claude vs. Gemini vs. Perplexity through identical prompt batches consistently ranks Perplexity ahead on citation accuracy and real-time grounding, which tracks given it’s pulling from the live web at query time instead of relying mostly on training data. Where it falls short is anything creative or long-form. Ask it to draft a full article, and the output tends to read functional rather than polished.
Claude: Built For Depth
Claude tends to show up strongest on tasks that require holding a lot of context and reasoning through it carefully. Testing rounds that track calibration, meaning how often a model’s confidence matches whether it’s actually right, have repeatedly put Claude ahead of the field, particularly on claims where being wrong actually matters. That combination of depth and caution is a big reason teams lean on Claude for long-form content and multi-step agent workflows rather than quick answers.
ChatGPT: Built For Breadth
ChatGPT still carries the largest install base of the group and the widest feature set, voice, vision, image generation, browsing, and a long list of plugins layered onto a general-purpose core. That breadth is a real advantage. Several independent testers also note the output quality swings more than the other three without detailed prompting. It’s the most flexible tool here, and flexibility cuts both ways.
Gemini: Built For The Google Ecosystem
Gemini’s advantage rarely shows up in raw model quality alone. It shows up the moment a task touches Gmail, Docs, Sheets, or YouTube, where Gemini can actually read and act on your own data instead of talking about it in the abstract. For teams already living inside Google Workspace, that access matters more day to day than a benchmark score.
Keep the bigger takeaway simple: none of these four wins across the board, and most credible testing in this space lands on some version of using more than one tool, matched to the task, rather than crowning a single winner. Revisit that assumption every few months. Standings shift, and last quarter’s leaderboard isn’t this quarter’s.
What Tactics Change by Engine
Here’s where this gets practical. Once you understand the mechanism and positioning differences above, the tactical shifts stop feeling arbitrary. They follow directly from what each engine actually rewards.
Perplexity: Lead With Sources
Because Perplexity leans this hard on retrieval, prioritize factual, source-rich content that matches a query directly. Original research, cited statistics, and clearly attributable claims perform better here than persuasive copy. Structure your content so a system pulling live answers can lift a clean, self-contained statement out of it without needing the surrounding context.
Claude: Lead With Structure And POV
Claude rewards depth over surface-level breadth, so long-form content with strong headings, a clear argument, and an experiential point of view earns more traction here than a shallow listicle covering the same ground. If you have real experience running the strategy you’re writing about, say so directly. That’s the kind of signal this engine’s reasoning tends to weight. [Internal link suggestion: long-form content / E-E-A-T guide]
ChatGPT: Lead With Flexibility
ChatGPT serves answers across the widest range of surfaces, so content that works as both a full explainer and a set of shorter, atomized pieces tends to travel further here. Conversational framing helps too, since a large share of ChatGPT’s traffic comes through follow-up questions rather than one query.
Gemini: Lead With Entities And Structure
Gemini’s advantage comes from the Google ecosystem, so optimize for visibility inside it specifically: clean entity definitions, structured data, and schema markup that helps Google’s own systems understand what your content is actually about. This is less about persuasive writing and more about making your content legible to a system that already has your brand’s data sitting in other Google products.
One more distinction is worth real space here, because it’s one of the most practical takeaways in this piece: these engines don’t weight sources the same way. Some lean more heavily on a brand’s own site content. Others lean more on third-party mentions and citations from outlets a brand doesn’t control. Several reward structured, schema-marked data over plain prose, regardless of who published it. Knowing which lever matters most for a given engine changes where you spend your time: publishing more on your own domain, earning more third-party citations, or investing in structured data that makes your existing content easier to parse.
KPIs for Tracking Performance Across Engines
Traditional rank tracking doesn’t map cleanly onto AI answers, so you need a different measurement set once you’re optimizing for GEO by platform instead of just SEO.
Start with citation frequency: how often your content actually gets cited as a source across these engines, not just mentioned. Track brand mentions separately, since showing up by name in an AI answer still carries value even without a citation attached. Watch whether your content lands inside the direct answer summary or gets pushed to a secondary link a user has to click through to find, because that placement difference matters more here than it ever did in traditional search.
Source diversity is worth tracking at the query level: how many distinct domains a given engine pulls from for a topic you care about, and whether your brand is consistently one of them. Query match quality matters more than keyword match here. Look at how closely your content actually maps to the real prompts people are typing, not just the keywords you targeted.
Content freshness rounds this out, especially for retrieval-heavy engines like Perplexity, where how recently you updated a page can affect whether it gets pulled into an answer at all. None of these metrics replace the KPIs you already track. They sit alongside them, and together they give you a fuller picture of whether your content is showing up where your buyers are actually asking questions.
FAQs
Do ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity Use the Same Ranking Algorithm?
No. All four share a similar training foundation, pretraining, instruction tuning, and preference optimization, but each product layers different retrieval and ranking choices on top of it. That’s why the same query can produce different answers across platforms.
What Is RLHF, And Why Does It Matter For GEO?
RLHF stands for reinforcement learning from human feedback: human graders rank possible responses, and the model gets tuned to favor the ones graders preferred. It matters for GEO because it shapes what a model considers a “good” answer, including, in at least some documented cases, a preference for more structured, list-style content.
Is GEO Different for Every AI Platform?
Yes, meaningfully so. Each engine optimizes for a different outcome and pulls from different sources, so a single, generic GEO checklist will underperform a platform-specific approach.
Conclusion
The mechanics genuinely differ by engine, and that’s not changing as these products keep evolving. But the goal was never to master four black boxes. It’s to understand the shared foundations well enough to make an informed, platform-specific bet, then revisit that bet as the landscape shifts, because it will.
That’s the kind of work we do at NP Digital: tracking how these engines behave in practice, testing content against real prompts, and adjusting strategy as each platform updates. Start with one platform where your buyers already spend time, apply what’s above, and measure it. Then expand from there.
http://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.png00Dubado Solutionshttp://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.pngDubado Solutions2026-09-16 16:00:002026-09-16 16:00:00GEO by Engine: How ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Perplexity Really Decide What to Say
http://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.png00Dubado Solutionshttp://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.pngDubado Solutions2026-09-15 15:16:022026-09-15 15:16:02Which AI SEO Agency Specializes in Oral Surgeons?
http://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.png00Dubado Solutionshttp://dubadosolutions.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/dubado-logo-1.pngDubado Solutions2026-09-15 15:00:502026-09-15 15:00:50How Can a Cosmetic Surgeon Become More Visible in AI Search?
Today, the most revealing search query may be the follow-up. The question people ask after they learn, compare, or reconsider often reveals what they actually need.
For brands, that next question represents a valuable opportunity to earn visibility, secure trust, and support a meaningful action. The objective isn’t to predict every possible prompt. It’s to understand the audience well enough that your content, evidence, and experience remain useful as the conversation evolves.
The first query doesn’t tell the whole story
Traditional SEO strategy has focused primarily on the query that brings someone to a result. But what happens after the first answer is delivered?
A user can now begin with a broad question, narrow the request, add a photo, ask for a comparison, and move toward an action without restarting the search process. The follow-up query is the connective tissue in that journey.
This dynamic more closely mirrors how people actually think. We rarely begin with a perfectly formed question. We learn, reconsider what matters, add context, and proceed down the rabbit hole.
The biggest change isn’t that people suddenly began asking related questions. It’s that the interface can now remember the relationship between them.
Traditional SEO best practices still matter. The strategic workflow has simply expanded. Instead of treating a single query and landing page as the whole assignment, brands must consider the first question, likely follow-ups, credible proof, and the next useful action.
The goal is simple: Help people answer the question they have now and make it easy to answer the question they’re likely to have next.
Be the brand AI recommends.
See where your brand appears in AI search, where competitors are winning, and what it takes to become the answer AI recommends.
See your AI visibility
What conversational search actually means
Conversational search allows people to ask natural questions, carry context from one request to the next, and refine their needs along the way. It can happen in a search engine, AI assistant, voice interface, on-site chatbot, shopping assistant, or visual search tool.
Three qualities distinguish conversational search from conventional search:
Context carries forward: “What about one under $200?” makes sense because the system remembers what “one” refers to.
Intent can evolve: A user may move from learning to comparing to buying within one interaction.
The format can change: A journey may combine typed text, speech, images, video, maps, charts, or product feeds.
Not every voice query or AI summary is conversational. The defining question is: Can the person continue the task without rebuilding the context?
Conversational search also overlaps with personalization, but the two aren’t identical. Personalization changes an answer based on what a system knows about the individual.
Conversational search changes an answer based on what the individual reveals during the exchange. Increasingly, search systems combine both forms of context to deliver more individualized responses.
Here’s a simple example:
Initial query: “What is the best carry-on for a five-day work trip?”
Follow-up: “I need a laptop sleeve and I fly budget airlines.”
Visual turn: The user uploads a photo of a bag and asks, “Is this likely to fit?”
Decision turn: “Compare two options that are under $250.”
Action turn: “Which choice can arrive by Friday?”
Traditional keyword research might stop at “best carry-on luggage.” Conversational strategy follows the full decision arc. Specifications, comparisons, images, policies, inventory, delivery data, and expert guidance all have a role to play.
A sample search can move from question to image, and follow-up to action.
How search became conversational
Search has gradually evolved from keyword-driven interactions to contextual, multimodal conversations.
Conversational search didn’t begin with ChatGPT or other AI platforms. Its building blocks developed over decades alongside changing user behavior.
Keywords and reformulation
Early web search encouraged short noun phrases that were often stripped of natural grammar. If the results missed the central need, users manually reformulated the search: “running shoes,” then “running shoes flat feet,” then “best stability running shoes women.”
The user carried the context between searches. SEO centered on keyword matching and landing pages built around primary phrases.
Semantic and contextual understanding
Search engines gradually improved at understanding entities, relationships, intent, and natural phrasing. Google’s 2019 BERT announcement emphasized the context and relationships among words in a query. Small terms such as “to,” “for,” and “no” could materially change intent.
For SEO, that shift reduced the value of repetitive exact-match language and increased the importance of satisfying underlying needs.
Voice and answer-first interfaces
Voice assistants normalized complete questions and concise spoken answers. They also introduced local, immediate, and hands-free situations. Related searches could have been “Where is the nearest pharmacy open now?” or “How long do I bake salmon at 400 degrees?”
Many voice interactions remained single-turn, but the lasting lesson was clear: Provide concise answers, accurate facts, and content that works when heard rather than read on a page.
Complex and multimodal understanding
Google’s 2021 MUM announcement framed complex tasks as journeys that could require multiple searches. In 2022, Lens multisearch enabled people to combine an image with text such as a color, attribute, or question.
The direction was already clear: Let people authentically express their needs while the system performs more of the work behind the scenes.
What conversational search looks like now
Generative AI can interpret natural language, retrieve up-to-date information, combine sources, and retain context within a single interface. That dynamic changes both how people express their needs and how platforms search on their behalf.
One question can trigger many searches
Google says AI Overviews and AI Mode may use query fan-out, running multiple related searches across subtopics and data sources. For example, a lawn care question may prompt research into treatment, prevention, safety, cost, climate, and timing.
The visible prompt doesn’t tell the whole story. A page can support part of an answer even when it doesn’t mirror the wording of the initial question. Keyword datasets still reveal demand, but they represent only part of the picture. Support questions, on-site searches, reviews, sales conversations, and prompt testing can expose the needs that come next.
Google has made the shift visible by connecting follow-up questions in AI Overviews to a continuing conversation in AI Mode. ChatGPT search similarly blends conversational responses with timely web information and source links.
On a practical level, people can reveal more information with every turn:
“Explain heat pumps.”
“Would one work in a 1920s house?”
“What if the electrical panel is only 100 amps?”
“Estimate the trade-offs in Southern California.”
“What should I ask contractors?”
Each question changes the best answer. A page that handles only the definition may support the opening request and disappear from the rest of the journey. The initial query identifies the topic. The follow-ups reveal what truly matters: budget, risk, location, use case, or deadline.
Multimodal inputs make the conversation more natural
People don’t need to translate everything they see into keywords. They can show a system an object, screen, plant, product, room, or broken part and ask a direct question.
In May 2025, Google reported that Lens handles more than 25 billion queries per month. Search Live has further expanded this behavior by allowing people to discuss a live camera view and ask free-flowing follow-ups.
For brands, visual SEO can’t stop at filenames and alt text. The image or video must be useful. Clear angles, close-ups, scale, labels, captions, demonstrations, and transcripts can help a person and a search system understand what the visual is trying to prove.
A photograph showing exactly where a reset button sits on an appliance is more useful than a polished lifestyle image of the same appliance.
Conversational systems increasingly connect research with execution. Search experiences can already assist with tickets, reservations, local appointments, shopping, and forms.
As agentic capabilities develop, accurate availability, pricing, policies, product details, and accessible conversion paths become an increasingly important part of discoverability.
A great article can’t rescue inaccurate inventory or a broken booking flow.
More needs are being satisfied before a click
Visits containing a Google AI summary resulted in a traditional result click 8% of the time, compared with 15% when no AI summary appeared, per a Pew Research Center study. Links inside the summaries received clicks in only 1% of visits.
One study can’t provide a universal CTR forecast, but the direction matters. A brand can influence a decision without receiving a visit. The clicks that remain may also represent a later, more qualified need.
When an AI response covers the basics, people need a stronger reason to click. They may want to verify a claim, see the original demonstration, use a tool, join a community, or check current availability. The click increasingly means: “Give me the proof, experience, or utility the summary can’t.”
That dynamic elevates:
Original reporting, testing, research, and firsthand experience.
Transparent authorship, methodology, dates, sources, and corrections.
Calculators, datasets, templates, maps, and interactive tools.
Newsletters, saved lists, communities, and other reasons to return directly.
Clear next actions that respect the person’s stage and risk level.
If an AI answer can repeat everything on the page, the page needs to offer something more.
Trust becomes part of the conversion
Increased automation can make human judgment feel more valuable. People don’t require a person to handle every interaction, but they do want to feel understood rather than processed — especially when nuance, emotion, or risk enters the conversation.
Good self-service respects people’s time. It should answer routine questions clearly, admit uncertainty, and provide a direct path to a knowledgeable human when empathy or accountability matters.
Search isn’t only an acquisition channel delivering anonymous traffic. It can be the beginning of a relationship that continues through a useful tool, newsletter, expert response, or community. That relationship can begin before the click and deepen after it.
This principle has guided my work in news SEO. The first search often identifies the event, while the next wave of questions reveals what readers actually need. For instance:
A coaching announcement may begin with a name and team, then expand into contract terms, career history, replacement candidates, and what the move means for the upcoming season.
A wildfire search sequence may begin with the fire’s name and location, then expand into evacuation zones, road closures, shelter information, containment levels, air quality, and the neighborhoods at greatest risk.
The opportunity isn’t to publish a thin article for every variation. It’s to build a connected resource that can serve the evolving story.
The strategic shift: Optimize the conversation, not just the keyword
This change can feel bigger than it needs to be. We must always remember: Simple isn’t stupid when it comes to audience engagement.
We don’t need to predict every prompt or rebuild an entire content program overnight. We need to listen more closely, connect related needs, and make our best information easier to find, understand, trust, and use.
Start with the audience journey, not the newest AI feature. Platforms will change. The need to be useful, credible, and genuinely responsive won’t.
Map follow-up paths around real decisions
Choose a high-value audience need and brainstorm what a person would naturally ask next. Map at least five types of follow-up:
Clarify: “What does that mean?”
Constrain: “What if I have a small budget?”
Compare: “How is option A different from option B?”
Validate: “What evidence supports that?”
Act: “What should I do, buy, book, or ask next?”
Use search data, support tickets, sales calls, reviews, community discussions, and prompt testing to your advantage, but keep the order straight. AI can suggest questions. Human behavior should tell us whether those questions matter.
Conversation maps should also reflect how different audiences express the same need. Test important journeys with native-language experts, accounting for regional phrasing, cultural context, and moments when people switch languages during an exchange. Translation alone may not reveal the same follow-up intent.
Not sure where to begin? Take five real user questions and write the most likely follow-up under each one. With that framework, you already have the foundation of a conversation map.
Five follow-up paths can reveal the full decision journey.
Build topic systems rather than prompt pages
Create a strong hub around the main decision and connect it to a small number of useful supporting resources. These might include:
A definitive overview.
A comparison or alternatives page.
A decision checklist.
A firsthand case study.
A visual demonstration.
A tool or calculator.
Product, location, policy, or service pages with current facts.
Don’t publish 30 weak articles that say nearly the same thing. Create one excellent explanation and support it with assets that serve distinct needs.
Internal links should follow the user’s questions, not just mirror the site’s organizational chart. On the anchor text front, “compare plans,” “check compatibility,” and “understand the risks” provide more direction than “learn more.”
Decide whether each follow-up requires a section, separate page, reusable component, or no new asset at all. Let the task (not a minor keyword variation) drive that decision.
State the answer first, then provide the evidence behind it. When the answer depends on specific circumstances, explain those conditions and include the relevant source, date, test method, or limitation.
Weak example: “This laptop has all-day battery life.”
Stronger example: “In our battery test, this laptop lasted 14 hours while streaming video over Wi-Fi at 50% screen brightness. Battery life may be shorter when gaming or running power-intensive applications.”
The stronger version gives a search system a clear, well-supported answer to assess and potentially cite. More importantly, it tells a person what the claim means and when it may not apply.
Before publishing, always ask: “What evidence would a skeptical reader need to believe this?”
Design for retrieval and reading
Keep important information in crawlable text even when a video, graphic, or app provides the richer experience. Use descriptive headings, concise definitions, and logical sections to help users extract information more easily.
Maintain the fundamentals:
Allow intended crawling and indexing.
Use canonical URLs and descriptive internal links.
Keep important information out of images alone.
Match structured data to visible content.
Maintain Merchant Center, product feeds, and Business Profile data where relevant.
Provide a fast and accessible mobile experience.
There’s no secret AI markup. Google says AI Overviews and AI Mode don’t require special optimization. Search systems can’t confidently use what they can’t access or understand.
Test whether people can continue the journey across voice, keyboard, screen-reader, and visual interfaces. Clear headings, descriptive alt text, captions, transcripts, accessible forms, and understandable error messages do more than satisfy technical requirements. They determine who can participate in the conversation.
Treat images and video as answer assets
For every important visual, ask: “What can this answer that text can’t?”
A product image can show scale and fit. A repair video can demonstrate motion and sequence. A safety graphic can clarify a warning sign. Captions, transcripts, and expert reviews can provide context the visual can’t carry alone.
Avoid decorative imagery that adds no information. Use descriptive filenames and alt text for accessibility without keyword stuffing. Place visuals near the relevant explanation and provide stable pages where they can be discovered.
Could someone learn, compare, or complete a step from this visual? If not, reconsider whether it’s necessary.
When someone arrives from an AI answer, assume they may already know the basics. Provide the next layer immediately:
A comparison after an overview.
A calculator after an explanation.
A “what changes for your situation?” breakdown.
Primary documents and methodology after a summary.
Availability and booking steps after local advice.
On-site search and chat should preserve useful context, cite source material, offer escalation routes, and admit uncertainty. Don’t send a well-informed visitor back to the beginning of the discovery process.
Preserve only the context needed to reduce repetition, not every detail a person shares. Sensitive information requires clear consent, limited retention, and an obvious path to human help.
Build authority people can remember
AI systems often synthesize multiple sources. Generic prose is easy to replace, but distinctive evidence and recognizable expertise aren’t.
Build assets people can associate with your brand: a named dataset, annual benchmark, expert rubric, original test, or trusted decision tool. Newsletters, alerts, memberships, proprietary tools, events, and communities can then reduce dependence on any single interface.
Search value increasingly incorporates visibility, trust, and direct audience relationships — not only the immediate click.
Conversational search is a cross-functional responsibility
SEO and content teams can’t deliver the full journey alone. Conversational search touches:
Content and subject-matter experts, who provide accurate explanations and proof.
UX and product teams, who build usable paths and context-aware experiences.
Customer service and sales, who address real questions, objections, and anxieties.
Ecommerce and operations, who maintain prices, inventory, policies, and availability.
Legal, privacy, and accessibility partners, who establish responsible boundaries.
Analytics teams, who connect discovery with engagement and outcomes.
The strongest strategy synthesizes these functions around the audience’s decision-making process rather than forcing each individual to navigate the organization’s internal silos.
Follow this practical workflow for teams:
Choose one important journey: Define the audience, decision, risk, and desired outcome. Combine keyword data with support transcripts, sales objections, on-site searches, reviews, and expert interviews.
Map the conversation: Branch the initial need into clarification, constraints, comparison, validation, and action. Mark what already exists, pinpoint weaknesses, and establish what requires a new asset or data source.
Match the answer to the format: Use prose for explanation, tables for comparison, images for recognition, video for motion, tools for calculation, and feeds for changing facts. Add firsthand evidence, expert review, dates, and limitations.
Connect the journey: Align the hub, supporting pages, visuals, operational data, and conversion experience. Decide when self-service should become a context-aware human exchange.
Test and improve: Sample initial prompts, follow-ups, and image-based inputs across relevant interfaces. Track accuracy, citations, gaps, and competitors. Improve weak branches instead of aimlessly publishing new content.
Measurement: A scorecard for conversational search
No single metric tells the whole story of conversational search. Begin with four questions:
Can people find you? Track topic-level visibility, multimodal discovery, branded demand, and accurate presence within a fixed sample of AI answers.
Do the right people engage? Monitor tool use, video completion, evidence-module clicks, return visits, saved items, and newsletter sign-ups alongside pageviews.
Do they trust you? Monitor citation accuracy, corrections, earned references, direct traffic, freshness, and successful human interactions.
Do they act? Measure assisted conversions, qualified leads, bookings, purchases, support resolution, time to decision, and retention.
Treat AI citation testing as directional, not as definitive market share. Outputs vary by interface, conversation history, time, location, account context, and model.
Document your definitions and maintain a consistent prompt sample before comparing periods.
Measure the journey from discovery through action.
The next evolution is likely to move from conversational answers toward conversational action. A person may have a broken appliance, troubleshoot it, compare replacements, check local stock, and book installation within one search session.
As AI agents compare, filter, schedule, and transact under user direction, accurate prices, clear policies, consistent product information, accessible workflows, and source transparency will become even more important.
Original evidence, named expertise, clear methods, and current source pages will help people verify what they receive. Don’t chase every interface change or create thin content for every prompt variation. The goal is to add value, not volume.
Discovery will remain distributed across search engines, AI assistants, social video, communities, commerce platforms, and brand-owned experiences. The goal isn’t to put all of your search strategy eggs into one chatbot’s basket. It’s to become the clearest, most useful, and verifiable source for the decisions your audience needs to make.
If AI can’t find you, customers won’t either.
Track your visibility across AI search, uncover missed opportunities, and grow your presence where customers are asking questions.
See your AI visibility
Make the next question count
The follow-up query changes SEO because it exposes the full shape of intent. People don’t experience their needs as isolated keywords. They learn, revise, compare, validate, and act.
We don’t need to predict every sentence someone might type. We need to understand the decision journey well enough that our content, evidence, visuals, data, and experience remain useful as the conversation changes. That means creating useful content rather than commodity AI-generated drafts, keeping important information accessible, and never fabricating firsthand experience, reviews, or citations.
The brands that stand out won’t simply answer the first question. They’ll listen, adapt, and earn the next one — proving that even as search becomes more automated, lasting authority is still built through useful information, credible evidence, and genuine human connection.