Open the full report (PDF) →

Get new research by emailOne email each time Five Blocks publishes a new study. Unsubscribe anytime.

Subscribe to our research

Download the report

PDF · 10 pages · 2.9 MB

How AI Describes Goldman Sachs

Download PDFOpen PDF

▶  Prefer to watch? See the 4-minute video below

Watch the video

Watch on YouTube · 4 minutes

Data: Five Blocks AIQ, Sep 6 to Oct 6, 2026, eight AI engines, 496 answers about Goldman Sachs and David Solomon. See all #DataNovember studies.

Open the full report (PDF) →

Get new research by emailOne email each time Five Blocks publishes a new study. Unsubscribe anytime.

Subscribe to our research

Download the report

PDF · 11 pages · 5.6 MB

What AI Says About PepsiCo

Download PDFOpen PDF

▶  Prefer to watch? See the 4-minute video below

Watch the video

Watch on YouTube · 4 minutes

Data: Five Blocks AIQ, Sep 6 to Oct 6, 2026, eight AI engines, 495 answers. See all #DataNovember studies.

To see what that means for earned media, we read the robots.txt files and page tags of 44 major news outlets, then checked what eight AI engines cited in 14,392 answers about the Fortune 100 and their CEOs (October 24 to 26, 2026). The short version: where a story runs now helps decide which AI engines can repeat it.

Many top outlets block some AI engines

Most big publishers now tell at least some AI crawlers to stay out. Here is how many of the 44 outlets block each engine.

Some of the most prestigious names in business news, including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Barron’s, MarketWatch, The Economist and NPR, leave only three of the eight engines unblocked. No outlet blocks Google’s AI Overviews or AI Mode, because those run on Google Search itself.

Some engines obey the blocks, others mostly don’t

A robots.txt file is a request, not a lock. So we compared how often each engine cited the outlets that block it with how often we would expect if the block had no effect (four news questions, three days).

The Gemini app, ChatGPT and Copilot largely honor the blocks. Perplexity cited its blockers at close to the normal rate, and Grok cited them more often than expected, mostly through Reuters.

The sharpest contrast is inside Google. The Gemini app cited none of the 25 outlets that block it. Google’s AI Mode cited those same outlets in 69% of news answers. Same company, same stories, two very different results.

For a comms team, a story in an outlet that blocks an engine is a billboard on a road that engine never drives. It may still be a great billboard. It just won’t be seen by that engine.

What this means for how you prioritize outlets

Think of earned media as deposits into a credit score for trust. AI engines are now among the lenders checking that score, and each one can see a different set of deposits. That changes the planning, not the goal.

1. Keep pitching the top tier. A front-page story still moves reporters, analysts, boards and Google’s AI Mode and AI Overviews, which no outlet blocks. Just don’t count it as AI coverage across the board.
2. Add engine access to your media list. Next to reach and audience, note which engines each outlet blocks. It takes a few minutes per outlet and it changes how you read your results.
3. Spread the story across open outlets too. If the message has to reach the Gemini app, ChatGPT or Copilot, make sure it also lands in outlets those engines can read.
4. Match the engine to the audience. Copilot sits inside Microsoft 365, so it is often where employees and corporate stakeholders ask questions at work. AI Mode and AI Overviews sit on top of Google Search, where most of the public starts. Decide which engines matter for the people you need to reach, then check which outlets those engines can read.
5. Measure over weeks, not days. News answers change fast. Only 30% to 60% of the links in a news answer came back the next day, depending on the engine. One check tells you little.

Press releases count again

In AI news answers, the press release is a real source. All four press release wires we checked are open to every AI engine. On news questions about the Fortune 100, Business Wire was cited in 201 answers, more than Forbes (186) or CBS News (185).

Keep that in proportion. Each wire still shows up in under 4% of news answers per engine. Business Wire’s best showing was 3.4% of Perplexity’s news answers, and PR Newswire’s was 2.9% on ChatGPT. But a release is one of the few things you fully control that every engine can read. So write it to be quoted: the facts first, real numbers, dates, and plain words.

Know the sources you never pitched

Stock and investing sites, such as MarketBeat, appeared in 40% to 60% of news answers on every engine. MarketBeat was the Gemini app’s single top source, in 21% of its news answers. Most PR teams never pitch these sites, and many never read what they say. If your company is public, you should.

Publisher deals matter too, but less than you might think. ChatGPT cited the 12 outlets with OpenAI content deals in 44% of its news answers, against 23% for other open outlets. Google’s AI Mode showed almost no gap (14.9% vs 14.0%). A deal tilts one engine. It does not guarantee anything.

News is only half the picture

Earned media drives AI answers to news questions. It does much less for the basic question, “Tell me about this company.” There, the engines lean on the company’s own website and Wikipedia. ChatGPT cited the company’s own site in 99% of those answers.

Owned facts do real work when they are published in a form AI can cite. In our study of what AI says about United Airlines, Delta’s “Corporate Stats and Facts” page was cited in 66% of AI answers about Delta, while United’s corporate fact sheet was cited in 4% of answers about United. 53% of answers about Delta mentioned its reliability, against 9% for United, even though United had a record operational year. And although United flew the most seat miles of any airline in 2025, Google’s three AI engines called American the world’s largest airline in 42 of 93 answers and United in 4 of 92. A claim with no measure behind it rarely gets repeated.

Silence has a cost too. In our study of how AI describes data centers, data center companies’ own websites appeared in none of 476 AI answers about community concerns, and 83% of answers about data centers and their neighbors were one-sided criticism. When a company publishes nothing on a hard question, AI answers it with other people’s words. Our Fortune 100 study found the same reliance on owned content at scale: 82% of “tell me about” answers cited the company’s own website.

So an earned media plan for the AI era has three parts:

• Earned: coverage in outlets the engines you care about can read.
• Owned: a website with current, plainly written facts, and a robots.txt file that does not shut out AI search bots by mistake.
• Wikipedia: an accurate, current article, improved only through Wikipedia’s disclosed process.

None of this replaces good stories and good relationships with reporters. It just means the scorecard has changed. A placement is worth what people read, plus what the AI engines they use can see.

How Five Blocks can help

Five Blocks tracks what eight AI engines say about a company and which sources they cite, every day, through our AIQ platform. We use that data to show PR and communications teams which engines can see their coverage, which sources are shaping their answers, and where owned content, press releases and Wikipedia can close the gaps.

The full study, with every chart and our method, is here: Which News Sites Can AI Read, and Which Does It Cite?

Open the full report (PDF) →

Get new research by emailOne email each time Five Blocks publishes a new study. Unsubscribe anytime.

Subscribe to our research

Download the report

PDF · 18 pages · 0.8 MB

Which News Sites Can AI Read, and Which Does It Cite?

Download PDFOpen PDF

▶  Prefer to watch? See the 4-minute video below

Watch the video

Watch on YouTube · 4 minutes

Data: robots.txt files and page tags read October 23, 2026; answers from Five Blocks AIQ. See all #DataNovember studies.

Open the full report (PDF) →

Get new research by emailOne email each time Five Blocks publishes a new study. Unsubscribe anytime.

Subscribe to our research

Download the report

PDF · 12 pages · 2.6 MB

What AI Says About United Airlines

Download PDFOpen PDF

▶  Prefer to watch? See the 4-minute video below

Watch the video

Watch on YouTube · 4 minutes

Data: Five Blocks AIQ, Sep 6 to Oct 6, 2026, eight AI engines, 494 answers. See all #DataNovember studies.

Download the report

Watch the video

Watch on YouTube · 5 minutes

Data: Five Blocks AIQ, September 1 to 30, 2026, eight AI engines. See all #DataNovember studies.

Open the full report (PDF) →

Get new research by emailOne email each time Five Blocks publishes a new study. Unsubscribe anytime.

Subscribe to our research

Download the report

PDF · 13 pages · 3.2 MB

How AI Describes Data Centers

Download PDFOpen PDF

▶  Prefer to watch? See the 4-minute video below

Watch the video

Watch on YouTube · 4 minutes

Data: Five Blocks AIQ, September 1 to 30, 2026, eight AI engines. See all #DataNovember studies.

Open the full report (PDF) →

Get new research by emailOne email each time Five Blocks publishes a new study. Unsubscribe anytime.

Subscribe to our research

Download the report

PDF · 18 pages · 1.7 MB

How AI Describes the Fortune 100

Download PDFOpen PDF

▶  Prefer to watch? See the 6-minute video below

Watch the video

Watch on YouTube · 5 minutes

In the press

Sam Michelson wrote about these findings for PR Daily: Your old crises are still showing up on AI. Here’s what to do about it. (November 11, 2026)

Data: Five Blocks AIQ, Sep 6 to Oct 6, 2026. Engines: ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Perplexity, Grok, Claude, Google AI Mode and Google AI Overview. See all #DataNovember studies.

LAST UPDATED – August 2026

Wikipedia Editing for Companies: 

Now that AI search has become so common, and Wikipedia is one of the top sources for ChatGPT, Claude and other AIs, one of the most common questions we get regarding Wikipedia is whether a company can edit its own page. The short answer is – it’s complicated, and there are important guidelines to follow.

Wikipedia’s Stance on COI – Conflict of Interest

Wikipedia’s purpose is to provide an encyclopedia of impartial knowledge. Content that is promotional, self-serving, or biased will often get flagged or removed by other editors.

Wikipedia’s official policy states:

“You are discouraged from writing articles about yourself or organizations (including their campaigns, clients, products and services) in which you hold a vested interest.”

In essence, editing the Wikipedia page about your own company is discouraged, as Wikipedia aims to ensure its content remains unbiased.

 The Risks of Undisclosed Editing

It’s crucial to understand that:

• Wikipedia editors frown upon and may penalize pages that appear to have been edited by the company without transparency.
• Your IP address is recorded and visible to others. Never attempt to edit anonymously using a company-owned IP address.
• The Wikipedia editor community actively tracks changes. Your edits can trigger alerts for engaged editors, who may swiftly revert or challenge your modifications.

Free Consultation regarding your brand’s Wikipedia challenges (and their impact on AI Models): Contact Us

The Gold Standard: Disclosed Conflict of Interest (COI) Editing

Over the past few years, a new approach to Wikipedia editing has emerged, known as “disclosed conflict of interest” editing. This method is now considered the best practice for companies seeking to improve their Wikipedia presence. Here’s how it works:

1. The company or individual creates a Wikipedia user account.
2. They disclose their connection to the subject of the article on their user page or the article’s talk page.
3. Instead of directly editing the article, they suggest changes on the talk page, providing reliable sources to support their proposals.
4. Independent Wikipedia editors review these suggestions and implement them if they meet Wikipedia’s guidelines.

This approach aligns with Wikipedia’s values of transparency and allows companies to advocate for fair representation while respecting the platform’s rules.

Why Choose Disclosed COI Editing?

• It’s compliant with Wikipedia guidelines, avoiding the risks associated with undisclosed editing.
• It allows for more aggressive advocacy on behalf of your brand, as you’ve already informed the community of your connection.
• It typically leads to better long-term outcomes and a more stable Wikipedia presence.

How We Can Help
At Five Blocks, we specialize in navigating Wikipedia’s complex landscape for our clients. Our services include:

1. Notability Analysis: Determining whether an entity has the required coverage for Wikipedia editors to accept and publish a new article.
2. Current Page Analysis: Reviewing challenges and opportunities with existing content and sources.
3. Content Planning and Drafting: Preparing content and sourcing for potential Wikipedia inclusion.
4. Community Engagement: Working with the Wikipedia editor community to review and submit proposed changes via the appropriate talk pages.
5. Vandalism Monitoring: Utilizing tools to monitor Wiki pages so that swift action can be taken when needed.
6. Foreign Language Pages: Assisting in creating Wikipedia pages in other languages, following the specific guidelines for each.

Free Consultation regarding your brand’s Wikipedia challenge: Contact Us

Important Considerations

• Wikipedia’s editing guidelines are far more intricate than they may appear. The sources, writing style, and editor interaction require significant experience to manage effectively.
• Timing is crucial. Introducing a Wikipedia page in advance of a potential crisis may be beneficial, while doing so during a crisis could backfire.
• Building a positive Wikipedia presence takes time and patience. It’s a long-term strategy that requires consistent effort and adherence to Wikipedia’s principles.

Ready to Improve Your Wikipedia Presence?

If you’re looking to create or improve your company’s Wikipedia page, we offer free consultations to discuss your options and determine the best approach for your specific situation. Our team of experts can guide you through the process of disclosed COI editing, ensuring compliance with Wikipedia’s guidelines while working towards your goals.

Free Consultation regarding your brand’s Wikipedia challenge: Contact Us

Still have questions? See our FAQ

How do I edit an error on my company’s Wikipedia page?

While anyone can edit Wikipedia, it’s best to use the disclosed COI approach.
Best is to work with an experienced firm to suggest changes on the article’s talk page, providing reliable sources to support your corrections.

How do you create a Wikipedia page?

Wikipedia has strict standards for notability, citations, and conflict of interest. We recommend consulting with professionals to navigate these requirements and increase the chances of your page being accepted and maintained.

Can you edit your own Wikipedia page?

Direct editing is discouraged. Instead, work with an experienced team to ensure you are utilizing the disclosed COI method to suggest changes on the talk page and let independent editors implement them.

Who can edit a Wikipedia page?

Anyone can edit most Wikipedia pages, but it’s important to follow the platform’s guidelines, especially regarding conflict of interest.

Can I see who edited a Wikipedia page?

Yes, go to the ‘View History’ tab at the top right of the Wikipedia page. The username of the editor appears next to each change, along with the date.

Remember, working with Wikipedia requires patience, transparency, and adherence to the platform’s principles. By following these guidelines and best practices, you can work towards achieving a fair and accurate representation of your company on one of the world’s most visited websites.

Free Consultation regarding your brand’s Wikipedia challenge: Contact Us

The COI Trap

Wikipedia’s conflict of interest (COI) policy exists for an obvious reason: people editing articles about themselves, their companies, or their clients have a personal stake in how those articles read. That stake creates bias, even when the editor genuinely believes they’re being objective.

Wikipedia defines a conflict of interest as any editing where you have a close personal or financial relationship with the subject. Editing your own company’s Wikipedia page is a textbook COI situation. This doesn’t make editing impossible, but it does mean there are specific rules you’re required to follow, rules that most executives aren’t aware of when they make their first edit.

What Actually Happens When You Edit Your Own Page

When a company executive edits their own Wikipedia page without following COI guidelines, several things typically happen:

The edit is flagged. Wikipedia’s sophisticated editor community has automated tools and experienced volunteers specifically trained to detect COI editing. New accounts editing corporate articles, IP addresses that trace back to corporate offices, and editing patterns that match promotional content are all triggers.

The edit is reverted. Once identified as a COI edit made without disclosure, the edit will be reversed. The original content, including whatever problem you were trying to fix, is restored.

The article is flagged. The Wikipedia article itself may be tagged with a COI notice, which tells readers that the article’s neutrality is disputed. This is often worse than whatever you were trying to fix.

Your account may be blocked. Repeated undisclosed COI editing can result in your account being blocked from editing Wikipedia entirely.

The permanent record. Every edit you make is stored forever in Wikipedia’s revision history. If you’re later identified as a COI editor, that history will be scrutinized and any undisclosed COI edits may be used to flag your contributions.

The Approach That Works and How We Can Help

Wikipedia does have a process for interested parties to request changes to articles, and it’s specifically designed for situations like this. It’s called the “edit request” process, and it works through the article’s Talk page.

Five Blocks specializes in disclosed COI Wikipedia work. Our team includes experienced Wikipedia editors who understand both the technical rules and the cultural norms of the Wikipedia editor community. We work transparently, disclosing our client relationships and operating within Wikipedia’s guidelines, because it’s both the right approach and the only approach that produces durable results.

We start with a free assessment of your current Wikipedia situation, identify the highest-priority issues, and outline what a compliant engagement would look like for your specific case.

Get your free Wikipedia page evaluation →

The AI Dimension

The stakes for getting your Wikipedia page right have increased significantly with the rise of AI. Wikipedia is a primary training and reference source for AI language models, Google’s Knowledge Panel, and dozens of other information systems. When someone asks an AI assistant about your company, executive, or brand, the response is often shaped by your Wikipedia page.

This means errors, outdated information, or negative content on your Wikipedia page doesn’t just affect people who visit Wikipedia directly. It propagates into AI responses, search results, and knowledge graphs that reach far more people than your Wikipedia page itself ever would.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is it legal to edit your own Wikipedia page?

There’s nothing illegal about it. Wikipedia’s policies are community rules, not laws. But violating those policies has real consequences: reverted edits, flagged articles, and damaged credibility with the Wikipedia editor community.

What if the information on my Wikipedia page is factually wrong?

Even factual errors should be corrected through the Talk page process rather than direct editing, if you have a COI. The proper approach is to post a specific, sourced correction request on the Talk page, this is the compliant way to address even obvious errors.

Can I hire someone to edit my Wikipedia page?

You can hire professional Wikipedia editors, but Wikipedia requires that paid editors disclose their paid status. Any legitimate Wikipedia editing service will operate using disclosed COI methods. Be very cautious about services that claim they can “guarantee” changes or that operate without disclosure, these typically use methods that violate Wikipedia’s terms of service.

How do I know if my Wikipedia page needs work?

Look for outdated information, factual errors, missing context, promotional language that Wikipedia editors have flagged, and content that doesn’t accurately reflect your current business. Five Blocks offers a free assessment that systematically evaluates all of these factors.

This post is part of our series Your Brand on Wikipedia, a practical guide to understanding, editing, and protecting your brand’s presence on Wikipedia.

Next: What Does a Wikipedia Editing Service Actually Do? A Look Inside Professional Wikipedia Management

Previous: How to Edit a Wikipedia Page Without Getting Reverted (or Making Things Worse)