By now, most of us have wrapped our heads around the fact that ChatGPT is shaping how people learn about products, policies, and even people. But a new report from Muck Rack puts some numbers behind that reality and offers a few surprising takeaways for those of us thinking about visibility, influence, and thought leadership in education.

The topline takeaway: Journalism matters more than ever, but mostly the kind AI cares about.

This isn’t another “robots are coming for your job” piece. It’s a recognition that generative AI models are quietly rewriting the rules of media influence. The good news is that a lot of what we’ve always known matters—earned media, credible sources, and subject-matter expertise—still does. But it’s also clearer now which signals are really getting through to the machine.

Yes, AI is reading the news, but it’s picky

The Generative Pulse report looked at over a million citations across ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude, and found that nearly half of all links cited in timely answers come from journalistic sources. Reuters, Axios, Time, and Forbes all ranked near the top.

Which brings up an interesting point: Forbes. Given its open contributor model and sheer volume of content, it’s notable that it still ranks high. The study doesn’t say whether a feature written by a staff reporter carries more weight than a contributor post but it does reinforce that sheer domain authority matters. If your story lives on a high-authority, high-output domain, it’s more likely to get indexed and cited.

That said, the report doesn’t claim that volume alone boosts visibility. There’s no chart linking frequency of publication with frequency of citation. Instead, the emphasis is on recency, relevance, and structure. AI likes content that’s current (within the last 12 months), clearly sourced, and written for humans, not SEO bots.

What about content on our website? Should we be publishing more of it?

Short answer: Yes, but make sure it has a purpose.

The report highlights that LLMs cite corporate blogs and thought leadership content fairly often, especially in response to advice-based queries. Notably, owned content isn’t being ignored. In fact, high-quality, well-structured, non-salesy owned content can be a sweet spot especially when it’s picked up in third-party coverage or linked across the web.

So if you’re weighing whether to write that explainer on your tool’s approach to building foundational skills – do it. But host it on your site, structure it clearly, and don’t bury it behind brand-speak. And yes, if that podcast episode lives on YouTube or gets transcribed and indexed, you’ve got a better shot at it influencing Gemini or Claude.

Education coverage actually has a leg up

Another reason to feel good: Muck Rack found that across all three models, education-specific sources consistently show up in the top domains cited. That’s not the case in every sector. Healthcare skewed government. Finance leaned heavily on aggregator sites. But education? More balanced, more domain-specific.

That means the niche publications and trusted voices in our space (e.g., The 74, Chalkbeat, Education Week) and even some foundation blogs are disproportionately important in this new landscape.

So what now?

  • Quality still wins: Focus on placements that combine editorial credibility with topical relevance. They’re good for humans and good for machines.
  • Structure matters: Lists, rankings, explainers, and awards are “sticky” with LLMs. Use that to your advantage.
  • Don’t neglect owned channels: But make it useful, transparent, and findable. Build with both audiences in mind—people and platforms.
  • Prioritize recency: Especially for thought leadership. A great piece from 2019 isn’t doing much for your AI profile today.
  • Think about AI as part of the ecosystem: Not a replacement for search, media, or relationships—but a new player shaping how influence compounds.