Launching today
Scribble Network
The product that makes AI recommend your brand
339 followers
The product that makes AI recommend your brand
339 followers
Your customers ask AI before they ask Google, and most brands have no idea whether they show up or lose to a competitor. Every other tool hands you a visibility score and stops there. Scribble does the whole loop: audit where you're invisible across every AI engine, create content that closes the gap, and amplify it through 50,000 creators who only get paid when AI cites them. A gap report won't win customers. Being the cited answer will.
Curious how the creator amplification side actually works in practice. Do the 50,000 creators pick topics themselves or do you assign briefs, and is there any way to see which AI engines ended up citing the content they publish?
Scribble Network
@sadkakcakohl2k Both, kind of! We build briefs from the queries a brand is losing, and creators opt into the bounties they want, so it's brief-driven but self-selected. And yes, that's the fun part: the dashboard shows exactly which engine cited which piece, per query. One creator post getting picked up by Copilot, Gemini and Perplexity at once is a real thing we've watched happen 😄
the query-and-log-citations approach is the missing piece in this space, most tools still proxy through SEO metrics like you said elsewhere in the thread. question the answers above didn't cover - what happens when two of your customers are competing for the same query? does Scribble end up running bounties against itself, or do you screen for that before taking a client on
Scribble Network
@galdayan Love how you're thinking about this.
We want to be an open platform and simply a facilitator between cited creators and brands. Competing brands advertise on instagram or any ad platform and it won't be any different here. But you do bring up a good point on being able to prove to competing brands that data and intelligence from each campaign is private and not even visible to us - will work on this.
The positioning around making AI recommend your brand is interesting, especially with Analytics and Marketing listed in the topics. Are you mainly helping teams understand where their brand already appears in AI answers, or is Scribble Network more focused on changing the inputs that influence those recommendations over time? That distinction feels pretty important for marketers evaluating it.
Scribble Network
@mia_qiao The honest answer is both.
The audit comes first, see where you already show up across every engine. You can run your brand on the product on our website and check in a few minutes.
But we also close the gap by actually getting you cited, and that's where our moat comes in. We have a creator network of 50k that we open up to brands; creators cover the exact queries you're losing (after trying the product themselves, ofc) and build the content foundation that raises your citation probability.
So for a marketer evaluating it, if you only want monitoring, plenty of tools do that (we do too). The bet we've made is that monitoring alone is a gap report you can't act on, the value is in the loop. Understand where you stand, then actually move it.
Going from 2% to 25% AI visibility in 3 months is a wild result, was that mostly from the volume of creator posts or did the content topic gaps that your tool surfaced make the biggest difference?
Scribble Network
@boyuan_deng1 Love this question, because the targeting made the volume matter.
Volume alone doesn't do it, we've watched brands pump out generic content and stay invisible. What moved the needle was sequencing it, we fixed the onsite gaps first that the tool surfaced, so there was a foundation, and then pointed creators at those specific queries with briefs built from the gap data. So every piece was aimed at a question the llms were actually being asked, on surfaces they actually read.
How do you actually verify that a piece of content got picked up by the AI engines versus just guessing based on prompt testing?
Scribble Network
@lkercmt2 Great question! Here's how we actually verify it: every time an AI engine (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, etc.) answers a question, it usually cites sources. We pull those cited source URLs directly from the AI's response and match them against our library of creator content — so if a TikTok or blog post pushed by one of our creators is a source behind an answer, we can show that exact link-up. It's not "does this prompt sound like it mentions us," it's "here's the actual source AI cited, and here's the creator piece it maps to."
Dropping screenshots below from our dashboard showing real citations for one of our clients mapped to the creator content behind them, so you can see it in action.
Happy to dig into any part of this further if useful!
Definitely looks like a useful resource for GEO, which is a market that lacks maturity compared to SEO and is crying out for orgs/products that help and give a boost to small startups. I find the pricing page slightly confusing because the headline pricing doesn't suggest any content generation for the insight plan but, scrolling down, it seems you get 10 pages of creator sourced LLM pages. This feels worth promoting in the headlines? Unless it's not as beneficial as it sounds. One other query. You say Claude is coming soon, but only for the Custom plan. Would it not be possible to select the four you want to be tracked? Perhaps swap Perplexity out for Claude etc. All in all, this is definitely a product I will consider using. Congratulations.
Ran the audit on my own site and the gap report actually flagged specific prompts where competitors were getting cited instead of me, which is way more useful than a generic score. The creator amplification piece is a clever angle I haven't seen elsewhere.
Scribble Network
@mirahazaraqb2 Thank you for actually running it! The specific prompts over generic score thing was exactly the design goal, a score tells you, you have a problem, the prompts tell you where to fight. Glad it helped!