Manipulating AI is surprisingly easy at the moment, because language models do not yet have a good spam filter. We still advise against it: it damages your reputation, makes measurements worthless and costs you penalty points on this site.
AI answers are now easier to steer than Google ever was. That is not our claim but that of Rand Fishkin of SparkToro. He put it bluntly in October 2025.
I think we're learning a lot more about how to influence LLMs. And to be honest, it's pretty easy.
In other words: we are getting better at influencing language models, and frankly it is quite simple. That is not an encouragement. It is a warning, and in this article we explain why.
Why manipulating AI is so easy right now
Fishkin listed what correlates with appearing in AI answers. It is about mentions, not technology. His overview from October 2025 looks like this:
- Brands that appear often in documents on the web.
- Brands that appear in recent documents.
- Positive mentions on Reddit and YouTube.
- Lists of the "best x agency" type published everywhere: on the company's own site, on Substack and on social media.
The problem lies in those last two points. Anyone who publishes enough lists and posts feeds the model with their own name. And the model does not yet see through that.
unlike Google, these LLMs don't sort of have the spam and manipulation and intelligence signals to figure out when they're getting manipulated.
Unlike Google, these models do not yet have signals to recognise that they are being played. Google has fought spam for a long time; AI tools are only at the start. Fishkin immediately saw how that plays out.
If this sounds like a recipe for using spam techniques to change AI answers fast, well my friend, you're paying attention.
Does this sound like a recipe for using spam to change AI answers quickly? Then you are paying attention, he writes. According to Fishkin, Wil Reynolds showed that many SEO agencies put themselves at the top of lists in exactly this way.
The agencies' list factory
EchoWi measured how big that factory is in August 2026. In four countries they opened 29 readable rankings of GEO agencies. Of those, 21 came from vendors in the category.
All 21 named themselves, 19 put themselves in first place. The 7 lists from parties with no stake, such as a CRM company, trade press and a business school, never named themselves (EchoWi, August 2026). Caveat: EchoWi itself sells GEO consultancy.
In Germany it went a step further. For the query "beste geo agentur" (best GEO agency), Google AI often cited a paid advertorial that was labelled as an advertisement (EchoWi, August 2026). On the source page the label is still there; in the AI answer it reads as neutral advice.
That is the core of the problem. Paid or self-written text becomes a seemingly independent recommendation via AI. If you want to learn which lists you can trust, read how to recognise a fair agency ranking.
The flip side: the CodeSmith case
Manipulation works the other way too. In October 2025 Fishkin described the coding bootcamp CodeSmith. According to research by Lars Lofgren, a moderator of r/codingbootcamp, co-founder of a competitor, posted on average one negative post a day, for 500 days.
According to Fishkin it cost CodeSmith eighty per cent of its revenue and dozens of jobs (SparkToro, October 2025). Reddit is exactly the source AI tools like to draw on. What appears there consistently comes back in answers.
The lesson is uncomfortable. The technique that pushes your name up can be used against you by someone else tomorrow. Anyone who joins this game makes it dirtier for everyone.
Why you should not want it
That it is possible does not mean it is smart. We see four reasons to stay away from it.
- Your reputation. FL PR calls a list with the publisher in first place without any calculation a warning sign (FL PR, 2026). Clients and journalists see that too.
- You are building on sand. When asked repeatedly, AI almost never gives the same list twice. The chance of that is less than 1 in 100 (SparkToro, January 2026).
- You make measurements worthless. If everyone inflates their own mentions, a visibility figure no longer measures trust but spam budget.
- Promises get checked. Anyone who comes in through an inflated list expects the results that go with it.
That third point matters most to us. Fishkin calls visibility as a percentage over many repeated prompts a reasonable metric, and a position virtually meaningless (January 2026). Also read why a fixed position in ChatGPT does not exist.
So measuring is not pointless. But a measurement is only as honest as the signal you measure. How to measure properly yourself is explained in the rule of repeating every prompt many times.
How this site handles self-published lists
We do not reward manipulation, we penalise it. In the LSAI scoring a self-published ranking without a disclosure of interest costs three penalty points. An untrue claim costs five points, and so does a guaranteed position in AI.
Fake reviews are the most serious: they mean exclusion for 12 months. Publishing your own list is allowed. Just state clearly that you are a provider yourself, and there is no problem.
We hold ourselves to the same standard. There is no paid placement, and our founder and his own brands are not ranked. How we safeguard that is set out in our commitments on independence. The first edition is in preparation; until then there is a provisional list based on public sources, without follow-up client calls.
What you can do now
- Search for "best" plus your field and check whether your own name appears on lists you had written yourself. Add a disclosure of interest or remove them.
- Invest in mentions you do not write yourself: genuine reviews, interviews, clients who talk about you on Reddit or YouTube.
- Ask an agency that promises AI visibility how it builds that visibility. If the answer fits the list above, walk away.
- Measure your visibility as a percentage over many repetitions, not as a position, and note what you changed and when.
Frequently asked questions
Can you really influence AI answers?
Yes. Fishkin writes that at the moment it is fairly simple, mainly through mentions in many recent documents and through lists. Language models do not yet have a good filter against spam and manipulation.
Is it forbidden to publish your own list of best agencies?
No. It only becomes misleading if you do not disclose that you are a provider yourself. On this site a self-published list without a disclosure of interest costs penalty points. See also: AI visibility tool: do you really need one?.
Why does manipulation work better with AI than with Google?
Google has fought spam for a long time and has signals to recognise manipulation. According to Fishkin, language models still lack those signals. They more often repeat what is repeated often. See also: Measuring AI mentions: branded searches and direct traffic as evidence.
What happened at CodeSmith?
A moderator of a Reddit forum, co-founder of a competitor, posted negative messages about the bootcamp every day for a long time. According to Fishkin it cost CodeSmith a large part of its revenue and many jobs. It shows that manipulation can also be used against you.
What is wrong with an advertorial that turns up in AI answers?
The source page carries an advertising label, but in the AI answer that context disappears. The reader sees paid text presented as neutral advice. According to EchoWi this happened in Germany. See also: Measuring AI visibility.
Does a manipulated mention stay up for long?
You cannot count on it. When asked repeatedly, AI tools almost never give the same list. What you see today may be gone tomorrow. See also: Zero click: why website traffic is no longer a good KPI.
How does manipulation break the measurement of AI visibility?
A visibility percentage means something if the signal is honest. If companies artificially inflate their mentions, you mainly measure who spams the most. Then the measurement loses its value for everyone.
What penalty points does the LSAI give for manipulation?
A self-published list without a disclosure of interest, an untrue claim and a guaranteed position in AI cost points. Fake reviews lead to exclusion for twelve months. The full scoring is on the methodology page.
So how do you become visible in AI honestly?
By genuinely being mentioned: reviews, interviews, clients who talk about you and content that helps people. That is slower, but it lasts. And it also works in ordinary search engines.
Does this site rank its own founder?
No. The founder and his own brands are not ranked and there is no paid placement. That way we aim to avoid doing what we criticise in others.
Sources
- We've Learned More About How to Appear in AI Answers (Rand Fishkin, SparkToro) (October 2025)
- CodeSmith Reddit reputation attack (Lars Lofgren) (besproken door SparkToro, October 2025)
- Best GEO Agencies: Who Ranks Whom (EchoWi) (August 2026)
- Can you trust best GEO agency lists (FL PR) (2026)
- NEW Research: AIs are highly inconsistent when recommending brands or products (Rand Fishkin, SparkToro) (January 2026)