The battle for GEO
As search becomes a reputation environment, questions about GEO ownership risk diminishing the full communications remit.
Nuance is often the first casualty of headline writing, and describing any corporate trend as a battle might strike some as a tad overwrought. But, several conversations across multiple cities in recent weeks, including an illuminating upcoming podcast with Charlotte Mceleny, suggest that functional responsibility for generative engine optimisation (GEO) is likely to represent another defining moment for the corporate communications function.
By now, the theory is clear. The PR industry has been quick to extol the GEO opportunity, thanks to the disproportionate influence wielded by earned and owned media on AI search results. The logical conclusion, they would argue, is that public relations practitioners are best placed to oversee GEO strategies, given their core currency of third-party validated sources.
For an industry that has long craved proof of its value, the emergence of GEO could not be better timed. As Wadds Inc's mid-year review of public relations research concludes, "no other discipline can claim that structural advantage."
From an in-house perspective, however, it seems unlikely that things will unfold as neatly as predicted above. Many communications leaders I have spoken to, in Cannes and beyond, have noted that marketing functions are beginning to exert a stronger gravitational pull over corporate GEO plans and budgets. Neither is it especially difficult to understand their case, resting as it does on brand visibility, content optimisation and demand generation.
