PR Opportunities
The sources shaping what engines say, ranked by influence — with where you stand on each and which ones are worth pitching.
Some answers are decided entirely off your site. When engines assemble a shortlist from three review directories and a trade publication, no amount of on-site work moves it. You have to be on those pages.
PR Opportunities ranks those sources by how much they shape what engines say, from your own collected answers — and shows where you stand on each. The list is external sources only.
Which answers count
By default the tab reads visibility prompts only — the unbranded buyer questions every Overview number is measured on. Perception prompts name your brand on purpose, and an "opportunity" measured on questions that already name you is not one. The All prompts / Visibility only toggle widens the view when you want the full citation picture, same as on Sources.
The columns
| Column | Reading |
|---|---|
| Source | The domain, with what kind of site it is: Rival's, Community, or Publication. The kind decides the play — a rival's you only watch, a community you earn, a publication you pitch. |
| Influence | The ranking. How much of the corpus this source informs: answers it is cited in, breadth of prompts it comes up for, and how often it is quoted against a claim rather than merely listed. |
| Answers | Answers citing this source, with its share of all analysed answers beside it. |
| Prompts | Distinct questions it comes up for — breadth, not just volume. |
| Quoted | Citations quoted inline against a claim, out of all its citations. Quoted is the stronger evidence. |
| You appear | The share of this source's answers that also name you. A red −N marks answers that cite the source, name a competitor, and do not name you. |
There is deliberately no verdict column: on a tab that exists to find sources where you are not yet established, every real opportunity would be labelled weak. The share speaks for itself.
Publications worth pitching counts the pitchable subset: publications with real influence (five or more answers, so the share means something) where you appear in under 85% of their answers.
Reading it honestly
Influence is the sort, not "gap": a gap on a source nobody reads is worth nothing, so the list leads with the sources that actually decide answers and reports your standing beside each. Sanity-check the Answers count before committing effort — a source cited twice is two data points, whatever its share says.
Playing each target
Directories (G2, Capterra, GetApp, Software Advice) — the most systematic win. Claim the profile, complete every field, drive review volume. Cited heavily for commercial prompts precisely because they are structured and comparative. Slow, compounding, entirely within your control.
Editorial (trade press, industry sites) — a real pitch. Lead with data rather than a product announcement; your own visibility numbers are unusually pitchable material. Long lead times, long half-life.
Community (Reddit, forums, Q&A) — participate honestly, correct inaccuracies, do not astroturf. Engines cite community threads because they read as unsponsored; behave in a way that keeps that true.
Working the list
- Filter to Publications, take the most influential where "You appear" is low.
- Use Prompts and Quoted to write the pitch around the questions the source actually decides.
- Track outcomes in Sources: once you are cited, your share on the domain climbs.
- Recheck monthly. Influence shifts as engines rotate their reading.
What to expect
This is the slowest surface in the product and the most durable. A directory profile improved this quarter keeps paying next year, because engines keep reading directories.
Expect weeks between outreach and movement: the page must be published, crawled, and then selected as a source. Judge the effort quarterly, not weekly.