OP-ED: The End of SEO As We Know It? AI Search and the Future of Discovery
With AI reshaping how we find answers online, the rules of engagement are shifting. Here's what creators, founders, and strategists need to understand now.
Earlier this month, I found myself needling something that's been nagging at me. So I did what any insight-seeking strategist does these days—I asked X: "Who else is currently pondering answer engine and AI agent optimisation?"
The response from Ross Simmonds, founder of Canadian B2B marketing agency Foundation and author of Create Once, Distribute Forever: How Great Creators Spread Their Ideas and How You Can Too, was immediate: a wave emoji. What ensued was a conversation that crystallises something you might be sensing.
Who else is currently pondering answer engine and AI agent optimisation?
— Andile Masuku (@MasukuAndile) June 12, 2025
How we got here
For the past two decades, Google has essentially owned the internet's front door. Here's how their empire worked: you searched for something, Google showed you ten blue links surrounded by adverts. If you wanted your business to appear in those results, you played by Google's rules—either through search engine optimisation (SEO), where you twisted your content to please Google's algorithms, or through AdWords, where you paid to appear at the top.
This system shaped everything. Entire industries sprang up around gaming Google's preferences. Content creators wrote for robots first, humans second. Marketing budgets poured into deciphering what Google wanted, then delivering it.
Now that's changing. Instead of ten blue links, we're getting direct answers from AI systems like ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Perplexity, and dozens of others, including newer open source entrants like DeepSeek. Ask "What's the capital of Mali?" and these tools simply tell you "Bamako" rather than sending you to Wikipedia or trying to sell you a holiday package.
Andile Masuku
New game
But here's where it gets interesting, and where my conversation with Simmonds began. These new "answer engines" (as the digital content and marketing industries are starting to dub them) face the same fundamental challenge Google did: how do you make money from giving people information?
During our brief X exchange, I found myself describing what feels wrong about some of these new systems:
"Imagine asking a shop assistant a basic question and instead of just answering, they stall—fishing for your intent, upselling alternatives, or quietly collecting your data to monetise your attention."
I get it, though. These companies have raised billions in funding. They've got cutting-edge infrastructure to pay for, staff to employ, shareholders to satisfy. The idealistic vision of "just answer the question" crashes into commercial reality pretty quickly.
Where it gets complicated
Simmonds reckons that there's going to be a split:
"Information retrieval vs emotional connection. Many will rely on the AI to simply get information (i.e. how long should I bake my lasagne) but they'll rely on emotional channels (podcasts, reels, TikToks and YouTube) to understand 'how to make lasagne like a grandma from Tuscany.'"
This feels profound. We may well be creating two internet economies: one for facts, handled by machines a la AI agents, and another for meaning, still very much human territory.
Pattern recognition
I’m struck by my own experience developing and executing content strategies and tactical media plays for leading global organisations. Working on community-building assignments and ecosystem engagement projects, the most successful approaches weren't about gaming Google's algorithm or buying more AdWords.
They were about building trust by curating and serving genuinely useful answers to real stakeholder questions and insight gaps, particularly from founders and investors, delivered through compelling media and meaningful in-person engagement.
But even then, I noticed that over-reliance on advertising channels like AdWords felt precarious. Not just because I've always been uncomfortable with hard-selling and hijacking people's attention, but because at some fundamental level, sustainable business happens between people who trust each other.
100%.
— Ross Simmonds (@TheCoolestCool) June 12, 2025
This is where I think the lasting moat exists for people. Information retrieval vs emotional connection. Many will rely on the ai to simply get information (ie how long should I bake my lasagna) but they’ll rely on emotional channels (podcasts, reels, TikToks and YouTube)…
Commercial reality
Here's what I think is happening with these new AI systems, and why it matters for anyone trying to reach customers online: the companies building them are facing the same pressure Google did to figure out monetisation.
Some are optimising for keeping you on their platform longer. Others are cutting deals with specific information providers. Many are collecting detailed data about what you're asking to build advertising profiles.
We're already seeing the early signs: Perplexity's licensing deals with (mostly) Western publishers, WPP’s digital marketing partnership with Claude (Anthropic), query limits for free users on various platforms, 'premium' answer tiers, and experiments with sponsored responses that prioritise certain sources over others.
Ultimately, for them, it's just business. And that means that these systems are developing their own biases and blind spots, just as Google's did.
The human element
By the end of our brief exchange, Simmonds and I found ourselves aligned on something: "...the lasting moat exists for people," he said. The technical systems will evolve to handle the mechanical aspects of information delivery, but human connection, cultural context, and authentic perspective remain irreplaceable.
It's not about choosing sides between human and artificial intelligence. It's about recognising that as these new systems reshape how information flows, the premium on genuine human insight - the kind that feels personally and culturally grounded - is only going to grow.
Google's two-decade reign over internet search might be ending, but the real question isn't who's won. It's what kind of information ecosystem we're building next, and whether we can do better than the attention-hijacking game that got us here.
Editorial Note: A version of this opinion editorial was first published by Business Report on 24 June 2025.