▲ 4 r/GEO_optimization+1 crossposts

I’m starting to think schema should be planned differently for AEO and GEO.

For years, schema markup was mostly discussed as a traditional SEO tactic.

  • Add structured data.
  • Help Google understand the page.
  • Maybe qualify for a rich result.

But with AEO and GEO becoming part of the search strategy, I’m starting to look at schema differently.

Because AEO and GEO are trying to solve slightly different problems.

AEO is about helping machines find the answer.

GEO is about helping machines understand who the source is, what they know, and whether that information can be trusted.

And that changes the way I think about schema.

For AEO, I’m more interested in schema that helps describe answer-focused or structured content.

>For example:

FAQPage for genuine FAQ content.

QAPage for pages built around questions and answers.

HowTo for step-by-step instructional content.

Speakable where supported and appropriate.

The thinking here is simple:

If someone asks an answer engine a specific question, can the system easily identify the part of my page that addresses it?

But GEO has a slightly different focus.

Here I care much more about entities, relationships, authorship, and authority.

>So schema such as:

Organization

LocalBusiness

Person

Article

Product

Service

becomes more interesting.

And properties like sameAs, author, publisher, datePublished, and dateModified help make those relationships clearer.

For example, imagine an AI system lands on an article.

Without structured data, it may need to work out:

  • Who wrote this?
  • Which company does the author work for?
  • What does that company actually do?
  • When was this information updated?
  • Is this the same company mentioned elsewhere on the web?

Schema gives machines a cleaner map of those relationships.

That’s why I now think about it this way:

AEO schema → help machines understand the answer.

GEO schema → help machines understand the entity behind the answer.

And some schema types obviously support both.

Article markup, for example, can help describe the content while also connecting the author, publisher, dates, and subject matter.

The same goes for Product schema.

It can make specific product information easier to identify while also strengthening the entity relationships around the product and brand.

But none of this means adding schema automatically earns an AI citation.

The content still has to be accurate, useful, current, crawlable, and worth referencing.

Schema is simply the machine-readable layer underneath it.

So instead of asking:

“Which schema should I add for SEO?”

I’m starting to ask two questions:

For AEO: “How can I make the answer easier to identify and extract?”

For GEO: “How can I make the source, entities, and relationships easier to understand?”

That feels like a much better way to approach structured data as search moves from rankings and clicks toward answers, retrieval, and citations.

Are you separating your schema strategy between AEO and GEO yet, or are you still treating all structured data the same way?

u/Murky_Hotel_4323 — 8 days ago

I stopped optimizing for rankings. I'm optimizing for AI citations instead.

Over the last few months, I've realized that my SEO workflow has changed completely.

Earlier, my goal was simple: rank #1 on Google. Today, my question is different: "Will ChatGPT, Perplexity, or Google's AI Overview use my content as a source?"

https://preview.redd.it/2l7gv1vcgiih1.png?width=1536&format=png&auto=webp&s=81846186af9275c52dd55891e53e7eb100eed449

Because of that, I've changed how I create and update content.

Instead of publishing new articles every week, I first audit older content. If an article has lost traffic but is still relevant, I refresh it with updated examples, statistics, and current search intent. If the topic has changed completely, I rewrite it, but I usually keep the same URL to preserve authority.

I've also stopped writing long introductions. Now I answer the main question within the first few sentences and structure the rest of the article using question-based headings. The idea is to make every section easy for both users and AI to understand and extract.

Another thing I'm focusing on is credibility. Every article has a real author, references trusted sources, includes relevant entities (brands, people, concepts), and where possible, original insights instead of generic AI-generated content.

Technical SEO still matters too. Schema markup, crawlability, internal linking, and a clean site structure help AI systems understand the page better.

Finally, I'm measuring something new. Rankings are still important, but I'm also checking whether my content gets cited by ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, and Google AI Overviews.

It feels like SEO is shifting from "Who ranks first?" to "Who becomes the trusted source?"

Has anyone else started optimizing specifically for AI citations, or are you still focusing primarily on traditional rankings?

reddit.com
u/Murky_Hotel_4323 — 11 days ago