AI VisibilityAI Search
Licensed publishers received more ChatGPT citations in a June study
A June study found more ChatGPT citations per page for OpenAI-licensed publishers. The association did not carry across other AI platforms.

Jump to a section
Publishers with OpenAI licensing agreements received more citations per page on ChatGPT in a June 2026 dataset. The same pattern did not hold across other platforms. The study shows an association; it cannot tell us how much of the difference the contracts caused.
What the researchers compared
Otterly.ai and Press Ranger combined 129.3 million citations, covering 19.8 million distinct URLs, with a register of 91 publisher agreements mapped to 314 domains. The citation sample covered June; the agreement register included evidence collected through 28 July.
On ChatGPT, pages from OpenAI-licensed publishers averaged 10.2 citations against 6.9 for unlicensed publishers: a 48% difference. OpenAI-exclusive publishers had a larger gap. But licensed publishers also differ in size, reputation, subject coverage and distribution. Those differences prevent a clean estimate of what a licensing deal itself contributes.
The authors describe the analysis as a one-month descriptive snapshot. Both organisations supplying the data sell services in this market.
The result depends on the platform
Google, Perplexity and Gemini did not show the same licensing advantage. Copilot’s apparent premium also needs care: almost all of its citations to Microsoft licensees went to publishers that held an OpenAI agreement too. Microsoft-only licensees averaged fewer citations per page than unlicensed publishers.
A combined AI-visibility score would hide these differences. Keep the assistant and answer surface attached to each measurement, along with the period and prompt sample. Our guide to measuring AI citations explains how to compare repeated observations.
Most citations were not to news
News and media accounted for 7.2% of the full citation sample. Among licensed publishers’ cited pages, commercial evergreen content was more common than dated news: buying guides, reviews and best-of lists featured prominently.
Within the study’s trade-versus-mainstream comparison, specialist publications received 75.8% of citations and led in 15 of 16 industries. Many of those specialist sources had no licensing agreement.
This supports a narrower conclusion than “buy a licence” or “write more ranked lists”: unlicensed and specialist sources remained visible in the sample. The figures do not establish a content format that will earn citations for any business. A useful buying guide still needs relevant comparisons, evidence and an audience with that question.


