Module 4 · Earn trust beyond your site · Lesson 10
Mentions, communities and video
Independent coverage, honest comparison pages, helpful community answers and well-structured video all add evidence about you. Earn them; do not seed them.
In this lesson
- Know which kinds of independent mention assistants tend to draw on
- Earn coverage and community presence without manufacturing it
- Get errors about you corrected on third-party pages
Assistants look for agreement between independent sources. When editors, comparison writers, community members and video creators describe your brand the same way you do, an assistant has more to go on and more reason to recommend you. You cannot buy that agreement. You earn it by being worth mentioning, making the facts easy to find and correcting errors when you see them.
Three rings of evidence
Think of the evidence about you in three rings. Owned: your site, your profiles, your documentation. Earned: editorial coverage, reviews by independent writers, comparison and “best of” pages, interviews and awards. Community: forums, question-and-answer sites, social discussions and user groups where buyers talk to each other. Lessons 6 to 8 covered the owned ring. This lesson is about the other two.
| Channel | What earns a mention | What to avoid |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial coverage | News, data you publish yourself, useful expertise, a clear story | Paid placements dressed up as editorial |
| Comparison and “best of” pages | Accurate facts sent to the writer, honest trial access | Paying for a slot without disclosure |
| Community answers | Staff answering openly, with their affiliation stated | Anonymous accounts praising your own product |
| Video | Clear titles, chapters and captions on genuinely useful videos | Thin videos made only to be indexed |
| Partners and integrations | Listings in partner directories and marketplaces | Link swaps with irrelevant sites |
Editorial and comparison coverage
Writers covering your category need accurate, current facts and something worth saying. Give them both: a press page with plain facts, dates and images, and a reason to write, such as original findings from your own data or a genuinely new capability. For comparison pages, contact the author with corrections and trial access rather than complaints, and accept that an honest comparison will sometimes recommend someone else for some buyers.
Communities: earn, do not seed
Community discussions are read by people and increasingly by assistants. The only durable way to appear in them is to be useful there under your own name. Encourage staff who know the product to answer questions openly, state who they work for and help even when the answer is not your product.
Video that machines can read
A video's pictures and sound are hard for a text-based system to use. Its title, description, chapters and captions are not. Give each video a descriptive title, a summary in the description, chapters with plain labels and accurate captions, and publish a written version of what is said on the page that hosts it. That turns a video into text an assistant can read and quote.
Partners and integrations
If your product works with other products, the partner directories and marketplaces that list those integrations are independent pages describing what you do. Keep your listings complete and current, use the same product names as your own site, and ask partners to describe the integration accurately on their side. These pages are easy to overlook and easy to fix.
Correcting third-party errors
When your scorecard finds an inaccurate answer, look at its sources. Often the error comes from a third-party page: an old review of a product version you replaced, a directory with your former address, a comparison with last year's prices. Contact the publisher with the correct fact, a source for it and a polite request. Keep a log of the requests and their outcomes, and re-check the answer after the page changes.
Worked example: Lumen CRM
Lumen is missing from most comparison answers, and the sources those answers cite are three “best CRM for small teams” articles that do not include it. The team writes to each author with a short fact sheet and a trial account. One adds Lumen in an update; one replies that the list is closed; one does not reply. Meanwhile two support engineers start answering small-team CRM questions in a public user forum under their own names. The team logs every contact and watches the comparison prompts in the scorecard.
Key takeaways
- Assistants look for agreement between independent sources; earn it rather than manufacture it.
- Video becomes readable evidence through titles, chapters, captions and a written version.
- Trace inaccurate answers to their sources and ask the publishers, politely and with evidence, to correct them.
Practice task
Adds to your plan: Evidence beyond our site
- From your scorecard, list the third-party pages that answers cite for your most important prompts.
- Mark each one: includes you correctly, includes you with errors, or leaves you out.
- Write the contact and request for each, and one community where your team will answer questions openly.
Knowledge check
Three questions. Pick an answer to see whether it is right and why.