Ask an energy sector chief executive why they want a higher profile in press and you’ll usually hear one word – visibility. Ask what’s holding their business back, though, and you get something far more useful. Maybe it’s a grid connection date that keeps slipping, or a consent decision that’s been sitting with ministers – as Jackdaw and Rosebank have for two years – while investors ask questions nobody can answer yet.

This second answer is where positioning should start. A leader’s public voice really earns its keep when it helps shift this kind of problem. It might get them in front of the officials redesigning a policy, or give a nervous investor base a clearer sense of where the business stands.

A lot of sector commentary doesn’t quite get there. ‘We need a balanced approach to the transition.’ ‘Industry, government and communities must work together.’ Nobody disagrees, but nobody remembers a word of it by the end of the week.

The good news is that most energy leaders already know enough to do this well. Here are six ways to make it count:

1.           Pick a position you can defend

It’s tempting for executive thought leadership to summarise the debate, setting out the challenges and the trade-offs and explaining why it’s all complicated. Journalists and policy officials know all this already. What they can’t get elsewhere is a clear view on one part of it, such as which planning reform would do most for delivery, or which grid constraint is costing projects more than the ones in the headlines, or what a stable fiscal regime would mean for North Sea investment. A view like this invites argument – and that’s no bad thing. It gives people a reason to come back.

2.           Narrow beats broad

An executive who speaks with authority on connection reform and stays out of retail pricing will build a stronger reputation than one with a passing opinion on everything. When journalists are on deadline, they call people who’ve been right on a subject before. So do civil servants putting together a consultation. Own one subject well and you become the first call on it.

Let the commercial need choose the subject. If connection timelines are what’s costing the business money, then that’s the ground to own.

3.           Get there before the decision

Energy policy runs to a calendar, with consultations closing and regulatory decisions published on known dates. A point made the week before a consultation closes can still shape the outcome. Two weeks later, and the moment has passed. Leaders who track this calendar and have a considered view ready in advance get quoted more often, and officials want them in the room.

Jackdaw and Rosebank are live examples. Public consultations on both fields closed in August, but their paths have since split. A decision on Jackdaw is expected any time soon, while Rosebank looks set to take longer. The leaders who have already set out a clear, evidenced view on what the outcomes means for supply chains, jobs and energy security will be the ones journalists call when it lands.

4.           Name the fix

Pointing out what’s wrong is the easy part. Credibility comes from saying what should change: the mechanism that would clear the connections queue, the threshold that should move, how downstream emissions should be weighed in future field consents, the clause the next draft needs. This makes a leader far more useful to a journalist and to the policy writers.

5.           Bank credibility before you need it

One pattern comes up again and again in our crisis and reputation work – the organisations that come through a difficult moment best are the ones whose leaders were trusted before it happened. An outage or a delayed project lands very differently when the chief executive already has a record of straight, specific commentary. Building this record while things are calm costs far less than trying to build it in the middle of a crisis.

6.           Judge it by what changes

Counting coverage is one way to measure this, but the better test is whether the positioning moved the problem you started with. Did it get you a seat on a consultation working group, or make investor conversations easier? If so, it’s working. If not, it’s worth rethinking the angle rather than chasing more coverage. Start with the problem and the profile tends to follow.

If there’s a problem holding your business back, get in touch with BIG to find out how your leaders can own the conversation and help shift it.

Humour used in corporate and consumer communications can be an effective, and often underrated, tool to launch a campaign, deliver a message or respond to criticism. But laughter isn’t always the best medicine.

Good Good and Callaway found this out the hard way. Intending to spoof the horror film Obsession, the golf brands created an advert that saw a male golfer push a woman to the ground after she reached for his club.

Within days, both companies had pulled the advert and were fielding accusations that they’d made light of violence against women. What started as a joke became a reputational problem – and reputational problems tend to evolve into commercial ones.

That’s the risk with humour – get the tone, timing and message right and it can be the building blocks of a relationship that outlasts a single campaign. Get any of these elements wrong and you undo goodwill and are left managing the fallout.

As with all comedy, timing is everything. With traditional media, including TV and radio, campaigns and messaging had to be planned out far in advance, with companies investing significant time, effort and money in a campaign designed to make their audience chuckle, for better or worse. A brand that’s too slow to react looks dated, while one still running last year’s reference looks tired.

Social media changed that. Brands can now react to trends or moments in record time. When a competitor announces a new product, the brand which shifts the conversation onto its own terms and pokes gentle fun at the rivalry cuts through because it’s fast and on brand.

Heinz has taken a similar approach over the year, particularly with its ‘Last Drop’ campaign, which found humour in the lengths people go to in pursuit of every ‘Last Drop’ of sauce. It was, organically, inspired by a mother licking ketchup off a child to avoid waste. It also reinforced the brand’s position as the market leader.

Research backs the use of humour in campaigns too, with Oracle finding that 90% of people are more likely to remember an advert if it’s funny and 80% are more likely to do business with a brand again if it successfully uses humour.

But that research doesn’t measure what happens when a joke fails to hit the mark, which is the side many brands don’t consider. April Fool’s Day is a good example: what was once a genuine opportunity for a brand that typically plays it straight to have some fun with its audience has become a crowded annual trend – so content really needs to hit the right note to stand out.

This is what brands should really consider when implementing comedy into their messaging. Not “is this funny?” but “what do we stand to gain if this lands, or lose if it doesn’t?” Knowing your audience matters just as much: brands need to understand who the target market is for a specific message, and the topics and trends they engage with, before crafting something intended to tickle the funny bone. There is a reason famous comedians try out new material in small venues before embarking on arena tours, after all. They need to gauge what works and what doesn’t before the stakes get higher.

Humour is one of the sharpest tools a brand has. It is also one of the few that can do almost immediate reputational and commercial damage once it’s been deployed. The brands who get it right treat it that way, not as a creative flourish bolted onto a campaign, but as a decision that starts with what the business needs and is judged by what it delivers.

To talk to us about your own brand, social media content, PR or reputation management, get in touch.

Last week, a cross-party committee of MPs urged the UK government to stop saying ‘net zero’. 

The Energy Security and Net Zero Committee’s report found the term has ‘lost much of its significant positive association’ and now works as ‘a lightning rod for opposition to climate action’. It recommended dropping the phrase from the department’s name and from ministers’ key communications, and talking instead about the benefits people will feel in their own lives. 

The committee’s reasoning is the revealing part. The political consensus that once let the UK lead on climate action has broken down, and rising living costs have left the public looking for something to blame. ‘Net zero’ became that something: one phrase absorbing years of bill rises and price shocks it didn’t cause. The transition didn’t lose public support. The word describing it became the scapegoat. 

That’s a striking admission from Westminster. Anyone working in energy communications will recognise it, because the problem was never the target. It was the language wrapped around it. In effect, the committee has told ministers what good communicators understand too well. Know your audience before you choose your words, not after. 

That lesson applies well beyond Whitehall. Net zero, decarbonisation, transition, consenting, curtailment: these are working terms, built by engineers, policymakers and analysts to describe technical processes precisely. They belong in industry articles, white papers and board reports. They do almost nothing for a household weighing up rising bills, a farmer negotiating a grid connection or a community facing a new substation along the school run. 

A consultation that misses its audience doesn’t just cost goodwill. It costs time, and time costs money. A contested application can add months, sometimes years, to a programme, plus the legal spend of defending an appeal that better engagement upfront might have avoided. 

An onshore wind farm’s connections argument might be airtight in a grid operator’s terms, but it still must survive a village hall meeting where residents want to know about road closures, construction traffic and the view from their kitchen window. Those two conversations use completely different vocabularies. The second one usually decides whether a project gets built without a fight. 

I’ve seen this first-hand in local engagement work with renewable energy developers, including Boralex, where community sentiment shapes the planning conversation as much as the technical case does. 

The approach that works starts long before a single leaflet goes out. Map who’s affected and what mattered to them last time round, not just who’s on the statutory consultee list. Go and listen before a line of copy is written, rather than drafting the reassurance first and hoping it lands. Build a community benefit fund with residents, parish councils and local groups instead of handing it over as a finished offer. 

It can’t sit with the comms team alone. Project managers, planning consultants and construction teams all need to be in that conversation from the outset, working to one consistent story, rather than briefed once the messaging is already agreed. 

Done early, that groundwork tends to surface the specific, local thing people actually care about, whether that’s a road junction, a listed church or a broadband gap, rather than an abstract worry about ‘the transition’. It doesn’t guarantee support, but it does mean the case a developer eventually makes is built on what the audience needs to hear, not on what’s easiest to write. Sometimes that means a change in timing. Sometimes it means talking plainly about traffic management instead of ‘delivering community benefit’.  

The same gap shows up nationally. At our recent roundtable with energy leaders in Glasgow several attendees agreed the sector remains too polarised in public and too fragmented in its lobbying, often approaching government individually rather than making a clear, unified, solutions-led case. Locally and nationally, the root is jargon used where plain explanation was needed. 

The temptation, once a word goes bad, is to reach for a snappier replacement and move on. That shortcut rarely survives contact with the same audience twice. Communities don’t necessarily reject ‘net zero’, or a wind farm, or a grid upgrade. They reject being talked at in language that was never built for them. 

The developers that get this right build audience insight into decisions early and close to the people making the call, rather than leaving it in a sign-off queue while the moment to shape the story passes. 

Got a consultation or planning application coming up? BIG helps energy and infrastructure developers get to know the people their projects affect – who they are, what they care about and what they’ll want answered. From there, we shape stakeholder engagement that speaks to those concerns in plain terms, from the first conversation through to planning and construction. 

If you’d like to talk to BIG about how we can solve your stakeholder communications challenges, please get in touch. 

As the famous chorus line goes in Joni Mitchell’s classic song, Big Yellow Taxi, “Don’t it always seem to go, that you don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone?”

It is a tune that Ed Sheeran could be forgiven for humming amid the ongoing debacle over his world tour.

After support act Macklemore was withdrawn from the bill for expressing pro-Palestinian views on stage, other artists steadily began to fall away, leaving the pop star with no support. Among those who deserted Sheeran was Finneas, the brother of pop star Billie Eilish, who said in a statement: “Artists must not be silenced when they speak up for the oppressed.”

The departures came hours after Sheeran said he would not be drawn into a public debate over Gaza, and stressed he was not responsible for Macklemore being removed from the tour.

“Macklemore coming off tour was the promoter’s decision, it was not mine,” Sheeran said on Instagram.

“I would never let down the fans who had made plans, nor would I abandon the touring crew and the other support acts and musicians who rely on me for work and to make a living.”

While doing something is usually better than nothing, in Sheeran’s case, this intervention simply made things worse. A closer look at his statement explains why.

“Those who come to my shows do not expect a political forum,” he wrote. “I respect Macklemore’s strength of purpose to stand up and shout for what he believes.

“However, there is room for multiple approaches to the same end: Peace.

“I choose to use my fame and platform to be a place of safety and sanctuary, to maintain diplomacy and keep conversations open, not closed. If we only focus on shouting the loudest, nothing will ever change. There are different approaches to being an advocate for change.”

Without getting into rights and wrongs of Middle East politics, and whether Sheeran should, as Macklemore urged, have taken a stance, what is clear from his statement is it lacked the heartfelt authenticity of the songs that have made him a worldwide star. And having grossed an estimated net worth of £370 million, his fans are clearly suspicious that his renowned way with words failed him at this significant conjecture in his career.

Notably, Sheeran’s Instagram account lost 150,000 followers in the aftermath, while Macklemore’s account soared by 750,000 followers. The rapper also pledged his $1m earnings from Sheeran’s tour to Palestinian aid organisations and challenged Sheeran’s promoter to match him. Faced with the prospect of implosion, both Sheeran and US stadium owner, billionaire Robert Kraft, have reportedly agreed to donate $2m each “to fight this humanitarian crisis”.

With his shambling, dishevelled appearance, and trademark low key checked shirts, Sheeran has never cultivated the image of a global superstar. It’s hard to imagine him on the cover of Men’s Health flashing his abs, a la Justin Bieber. He is also known for his philanthropy, donating his entire wardrobe to charity in 2014 and running a charity providing music lessons to under-18s in his home county of Suffolk.

Against this humble backdrop, his initial sorry/not sorry approach simply didn’t wash, and it remains to be seen whether his actions can speak louder than his previous words.

The first rule of crisis comms is that any intervention should aim for repairing reputation: sometimes that means apologising; on other occasions it means explaining the circumstances to achieve balance; often, it is both. But at the very least, it requires those in the thick of it to act with integrity, own up to any mistakes, demonstrate accountability, and outline clear corrective actions. Without taking these steps, reputation management can quickly backfire and destroy any remaining vestiges of trust.

Ed Sheeran’s Mr Nice Guy image is crumbling, and the damage is becoming serious. After more than a decade of dominating the music industry, time will tell if he can retain his appeal among all but his most ardent fans.

If you’d like to talk to BIG about how we can solve your reputational challenges, please get in touch.

Ben Palmer, Senior Account Manager at BIG Partnership, looks at how businesses in the north-east of Scotland can tell their stories to the right audience.

The energy sector in the UK supports roughly 1.48 million jobs, around 1 in every 25 people across the country. That’s 1.48 million people, 1.48 million families and 1.48 million stories. Each and every one of those individuals will have a tale to tell about their professional career.

Energy can be a hard story to sell to media, though headlines of the impacts of domestic and global politics on household bills are as commonplace as ever. Negative stories generate negative headlines and those types of stories don’t need to sell themselves to outlets in the same way that a corporation launching a new product might.

But there are important, often more positive stories than bills shooting up, that need airtime too: the technologies driving the energy transition, the research being undertaken that’s shaping the future of the sector, the work being done to ensure that the country’s energy transition is successful. Robert Gordon University’s latest report which warns that the north-east of Scotland risks losing thousands of high-value jobs and critical skills is one excellent example of that.

For those of us in the energy sector – and particularly those of us in this region, who are only too aware of the financial pressures facing the industry – there is a challenge to make such narratives attractive to media. How do you tell a story in a way that cuts through to the audience you actually want to reach?

In our case, the audience is often the Westminster government, whose Energy Profits Levy is widely blamed for the accelerated downturn in the North Sea oil and gas sector and consequently a lack of investment in renewables.

While it may be a story we’re familiar with, the tale of the so-called Windfall Tax is one dogged in numbers: a 78% tax rate, the end of which if brought forward could increase tax receipts from £32.9 billion to £48.6 billion, according to OEUK. It’s important stuff but as a journalist once said to a colleague: tell me what’s interesting, not what’s important.

For journalists, what they really want to hear about is the people behind the sector.

Of those 1.48 million, there will be engineers, offshore workers, supply chain personnel and communities that all have stories which are interesting. But how do you bring this to life?

Consider A Town Called Bruce, a campaign designed by my colleagues at BIG which told the story of a town called Bruce, 200 miles north-east of Aberdeen in the North Sea. It’s not a town, obviously, but rather Serica Energy’s Bruce platform, a collection of individual stories brought together on one structure which will be familiar to others across the basin.

Or look at how Dales Marine launched its recruitment drive for new apprentices earlier this year. Interviews with Energy Voice showcased the skills they have learned, their commitment to the sector and why they believe the apprenticeship puts them on a steady and successful career path. Comments directly from source to press without the corporate spin which journalists loathe.

The energy sector has a plethora of stories to tell, but in the wider mainstream news spectrum, it can often be overlooked. Geopolitics, crime and culture may all be ahead in the pecking order but even these serve as a reminder of what’s key to making them intriguing: people are at the forefront of the narrative in each.

If you work in the industry and want your story told, start with your people. Not the megawatts, not the tax rates, not the transition targets. The engineer who came offshore after 20 years in manufacturing. The apprentice who turned down a university place. The supply chain business keeping a community employed. Those are the stories media will take, and they’re the ones that reach the audiences that matter.

If you’d like to talk to BIG about how we can help to solve your business challenges, please get in touch.

Why everyone’s feed looks the same (and how to fix it)

You might have noticed over the past few years that brands are all starting to look a little, well, samey. Beauty packaging is stuck in the same Gen-Z bubblegum colour schemes and drinks brands are all cycling through the same CBD-strawberry-matcha mashups. But social media is where the copying is easiest to catch in the act. Open your own feed and you’ll find the same butter-yellow fonts, verbal hooks and Canva template carousels.

Why we’re all copying each other

That’s because we’ve shifted from original thinking to reverse-engineering. Having to keep up with rapid changes in channel algorithms has resulted in us all watching to see what works before running the same format through our own channels. We’re all chasing the same algorithmic wave before it breaks.

Trends are fresh one week, pastiche the next. The thing is, chasing changing platform playbooks isn’t a shortcut to relevance.

What makes a brand feel relevant

The UTA Culture Index report surveyed more than 10,000 brands to find out what makes a brand feel culturally relevant. Durability came out on top, cited by 85% of the general population as the single biggest driver of relevance. Community Engagement was second and Authenticity third. What didn’t make the top of the list: being everywhere, being the loudest, or being the fastest to hop on a trend.

The takeaway? Brands are burning momentum trying to win a competition consumers couldn’t care less about.

Meanwhile the room for any of it to land is shrinking. Ofcom’s 2026 Adults’ Media Use and Attitudes report found that only 49% of UK social media users now actively share or comment (down from 61% the previous year). People are becoming spectators on platforms built for participation. Producing more content in the same visual language as everyone else isn’t cutting through that. It’s adding to a feed fewer people are actually engaging with.

Brands doing it differently

Some brands worked this out early. The fashion house JACQUEMUS built a recognisable social media identity on pioneering surreal, oversized product stunts as well as sharing the founder’s own unfiltered camera-roll shots of everyday beauty. While FFERN treats its seasonal perfume launches like short stories. Their analogue style content means when you view their posts, you feel like you’re sat under an ancient oak tree in dappled sunlight wrapped in scents of bergamot and lemon verbena, (seriously). Both brands are unmistakably original. Unmistakably human. Unmistakably authentic.

How to chart your own course

So, for brands who want to break the cycle, what does that look like in practice?

1. Trust your team to move at the speed of the moment

Anyone who works in social will tell you the Achilles’ heel to their success is the approval chain. Because a reactive idea that needs three rounds of sign-off is no longer reactive by the time it’s live. Give your social team the trust and room to execute on fresh thinking, and back them once it’s out.

2. Treat social as a conversation, not a megaphone

Most brand accounts (and most accounts, full stop) are broadcasting into a feed of other accounts also broadcasting. Instead of screaming into the void, respond to your audience. Ask questions you truly mean. Manage your social accounts as they were originally intended to be: socially!

3. Step away from the feed to find ideas

Scrolling the same algorithmic loop for inspiration returns the same references everyone else is scrolling past too. A walk in nature, a visit to a gallery, or an afternoon at the cinema does more for original thinking than another hour of source material that’s already been recycled twice.

4. Go back to who you’re actually talking to

It’s easy to lose the thread of your customer’s needs under the pressure of filling out a content calendar. Talk to them. Find out what they really want from your products and services. Learn what they’re passionate about. Use this information to form the basis of your thinking. When you understand their pain points, you’ll be able to communicate to them in a way that’s authentic.

5. Find the people your audience already trusts, and work with them properly

Build long-lasting and genuine relationships with influencers and creators. Users are increasingly following individuals with real expertise in a space over brand accounts (for example, financial advice). A credible voice inside a community your brand wants to reach will do more than trying to pigeonhole content formats that don’t naturally align with your brand tone of voice.  

Trend cycles will keep churning, but in the fight to be heard online, it’s the brands that understand a marathon beats a sprint who win in the end.

To talk to BIG about how we can help to solve your social media challenges, get in touch at [email protected]

Why trust is the organic lever you can still control

Here’s a number that caught my eye when reviewing the BIG Partnership website performance back in April. Visits that arrive from ChatGPT view 1.64 pages per session. In comparison, organic search sends us 1.20, direct is 1.10, and social sits at 1.00. So, AI referrals may be the newest, smallest, most-hyped source of traffic we have, but crucially it is also the most engaged one we currently track.

That single number captures the shift I want to talk about. AI isn’t just changing how many people reach your website, it’s also changing who they are and how they behave when they get there. And it’s quietly rewriting the rules for how brands get found in the first place.

Search left home

For 20 years, search had one home. You optimised for Google (yes, and the others too, but let’s be real, it was mainly Google), you competed for a spot in the ten blue links, and if you did it well, people clicked through to your site. That world is changing.

Search now happens across a whole ecosystem of platforms. Data from SparkToro and Datos, published in early 2026, puts traditional search engines at roughly 81% of US search behaviour, with commerce platforms taking 10%, social networks 5%, AI tools 3% and 1% across other platforms. The percentages will keep moving. The direction of travel is the point: people discover brands through many front doors now, and a lot of those doors don’t lead to a click on your website.

Even inside that shrinking 81% of traditional search, the click is under pressure. Google increasingly answers the question on the results page through AI Overviews, so the user gets what they came for and never visits a site at all. Ahrefs research from early 2026 found the top-ranking page’s click-through rate is as much as 58% lower where an AI Overview appears.

So here’s the honest summary. There are more places to be found than ever, and fewer of them reward you with a visit. Clicks are no longer the currency. Being chosen by algorithms, AI chatbots and ultimately consumers, is.

Fewer visits, better visits

This is where that 1.64 comes back into play. If AI referrals were low-quality noise, they’d be easy to ignore. They’re the opposite. And we’re not the only ones seeing it: Adobe, drawing on more than a trillion visits to US retail sites, found in March 2026 that AI-referred shoppers viewed 13% more pages per visit than other traffic and spent almost 50% longer on site. Better still, they converted at a rate 42% higher than non-AI traffic.

When someone arrives from the likes of ChatGPT or Claude, an AI has already done the filtering. It’s read the question, weighed up the options and decided your brand was worth naming. The person clicking through isn’t window-shopping. They’ve been handed a recommendation, and they turn up warmer, more informed and further down the purchase journey than a cold searcher poking at ten blue links.

Fewer visits that convert better isn’t a downgrade. For most of the clients we work with, it’s a better deal than the traffic it replaces. The question is how you earn those recommendations in the first place.

AI rewards trust, and trust is built through brand

Here’s the part that should change how you spend your marketing budget. When an AI system decides which sources to cite, amplify or summarise, it leans towards the signals of strong, consistent, well-established brands. It’s trying to answer four questions about you, whether you like it or not.

Who are you?

Can an AI recognise you as a distinct entity, and does it actually understand what you do and what you stand for? This is where a lot of sites fall down. If your own website can’t state plainly what you are, who you’re for and why you matter, in words real people use, you can’t expect a machine to work it out on your behalf.

Where are you?

What does your presence look like beyond your own website? This is the digital estate you can claim and control: your Google Business Profile, your LinkedIn and other social profiles, Glassdoor, Trustpilot, the relevant industry directories and listings. Every one of these is a place you can put a consistent, accurate version of who you are, and every one gives an AI another reference point that says you’re a real, established organisation. Claiming and maintaining them is some of the most straightforward trust-building work you can do.

Who trusts you?

Are credible, independent sources talking about you? Third-party mentions, coverage and reviews you didn’t write are the proof a machine reads as other people taking you seriously. You can invite them and make them easy to leave, but you can’t manufacture them, and that’s exactly why they carry weight.

Does it all connect?

Is your identity consistent enough that the machine can join the dots with confidence? A machine is constantly cross-referencing the picture you paint on your website against your profiles, your listings and what others say about you, looking for a consistent, verifiable story. Different company descriptions, an old address here, a name variation there, a positioning that’s moved on everywhere except the places you forgot to update, and the whole thing gets harder to trust.

None of that is new. What’s new is that these trust signals now feed directly into machine-readable visibility. Brand is no longer only about how people feel. It’s about whether an algorithm can verify you well enough to put your name in front of someone.

That reframes trust from a soft objective into the most powerful organic lever we can still control. We can’t control Google’s algorithm or ChatGPT’s training data. We can control how trustworthy, consistent and well-attributed our brand looks to the systems doing the choosing.

Five ways to start building it

Here’s where I’d begin:

1. Put your people front and centre.

Audiences trust people more than logos, and so, increasingly, do the machines. When your employees share their expertise and their working lives, it signals an authenticity no campaign budget can manufacture. Pick three to five genuine voices, build proper author profiles for them, and give them a content brief rather than a script.

2. Make room for your customers.

No brand voice is as convincing as a customer who had no reason to be nice. User-generated content gives AI systems and search engines the third-party proof that your own copy can’t replicate. Invite it and make it easy for your customers to get involved.

3. Treat reviews and case studies as infrastructure.

They live exactly where your audience looks before they commit, and AI systems actively surface this kind of independently-attributed content. This isn’t a nice-to-have on a quiet quarter. It’s the proof that you deliver what you promise.

4. Put a name to everything you publish.

Nameless content earns no authority. Google’s E-E-A-T guidance and the AI systems that echo it reward content attributed to identifiable experts with real credentials. Add author bylines to every article, write proper bio pages that set out each person’s focus and credentials, and use Person schema so the machines can connect the author to the work.

5. Keep earning coverage.

Being talked about isn’t vanity. It’s how the machines confirm you exist. Press coverage and brand mentions create the off-site footprint that tells search and AI systems you’re a real, recognised organisation. This is the point where PR and SEO stop being separate budgets and start being the same job.

The lever worth pulling

We’ve written before on this blog about trust as the thing that makes choosing easier for people. Our Strategy Director, Paul Hadfield, recently tackled the question “Are you making your brand easy to trust?”, and I previously discussed the ever-growing case for combining SEO and PR. All of that still holds and the direction of change is continuing.

The brands that win the next few years won’t be the ones chasing every new platform or waiting for an algorithm update to rescue them. They’ll be the ones that stop treating search, PR, content and brand as separate budgets with separate goals, and start running them as one job with one aim: being a source worth trusting.

The digital world has changed. Trust is how you stay found in it.

To speak to our digital team about how we can help you to solve your SEO challenges, get in touch at [email protected].