It’s Time to Do Your LLM Visibility Test
This is what happened when I did mine.
I recently ran an LLM Visibility Test across five large language models: ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Perplexity, and Copilot. I used new, free accounts and asked each LLM the same four questions about my professional work, public reputation, and online expertise.
The goal wasn’t vanity searching. I wanted to see whether multiple LLMs had a similar or different story about what I did professionally. In other words, I wanted to see what kind of AI-readable version of my work currently exists online.
The results were much more revealing than I expected.
More People Are Using LLMs Instead of Google to Understand What Someone Does
More people are now using LLMs like ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Copilot, and Perplexity the way they once used Google. Instead of searching for websites directly, they are asking tools questions like:
“Who is this person?”
“What are they known for?”
“Who works in podcast discoverability?”
“Who talks about AI-assisted communication?”
“Who helps podcasters grow their audience?”
That shift changes online visibility completely.
Traditional SEO was often about ranking pages and driving clicks. AI visibility is increasingly about whether LLMs can piece together a coherent story from scattered public information across podcasts, transcripts, articles, newsletters, guest appearances, and social posts.
That’s a completely different kind of visibility problem.
The LLM Visibility Test Used the Same Four Questions Across Five LLMs
The experiment itself was intentionally simple. I used the same four prompts with each LLM:
What is Stephanie Fuccio known for professionally?
What professional positioning emerges around her public work?
Is she publicly associated with podcast discoverability, AI-assisted communication, or podcast growth strategy?
What public sources support these conclusions?
Then I compared the patterns that emerged across the LLMs. I was less interested in perfect factual accuracy and much more interested in consistency, recurring themes, and category associations.
That’s where the online story about your work starts becoming visible.
Multiple LLMs Independently Associated Me With Podcast Discoverability and AI-Assisted Communication
This was probably the most important result professionally.
I expected most of the LLMs to identify me primarily as a podcaster, podcast editor, or podcast consultant. They did identify those themes, but multiple LLMs independently highlighted much broader positioning around:
podcast discoverability
AI-assisted communication
creator workflows
discoverability strategy
communication systems
human-centered communication
I didn’t heavily force those terms in the prompts themselves, which made the consistency across the LLMs interesting.
This wasn’t just me posting about these topics here and there. The same patterns kept showing up across multiple LLMs and across years of my public work.
The LLMs Described My Work More Strategically Than I Usually Do
One of the strangest parts of the experiment was realizing that several LLMs described my work in language that sounded more strategic and senior-level than the way I usually describe myself publicly.
What I normally say about my work online:
“I help business podcasters communicate more clearly and use tools like ChatGPT without losing their voice.”
What Gemini “said” about my work based on my online presence:
“She frames herself as an adaptable media strategist and translator of emerging tools for community leaders and small business owners.”
Neither description is wrong. I’m usually just much more practical and grounded in how I talk about my work online, while the LLMs were processing years of repeated public patterns across multiple platforms.
That revealed something really interesting about LLM visibility.
The systems were not just identifying what I do. They appeared to be assembling a broader thematic picture from years of scattered public material.
That feels like a significant shift in how the internet is starting to interpret expertise.
Older Internet Identities Still Echo Inside Newer LLMs
Another major insight became obvious very quickly: apparently the internet never forgets anything. Cool cool cool.
Several of the LLMs strongly associated me with:
expat life
language learning
cross-cultural communication
teaching English abroad
global communication perspectives
And honestly, that makes sense. I spent years creating content around those subjects before shifting more heavily toward podcast discoverability, AI-assisted communication, creator workflows, and GEO-related communication strategy.
What stood out was how much weight those older identity signals still carried across the LLMs. Many professionals assume we can pivot online by changing a headline or posting about a new topic for a few months. But LLMs appear to look at the broader history of our public work, not just the topics we’re discussing right now.
Which honestly explains why older internet identities still echo so loudly inside newer LLMs.
The Biggest Takeaway From This Experiment
The internet is already telling LLMs a story about your work. The real question is whether it’s the story you intended to tell.
And increasingly, that story appears to be built from years of:
repeated language
recurring themes
podcast titles
transcripts
newsletters
platform descriptions
communication patterns
public conversations
That realization completely changed how I think about online discoverability. Because this is no longer just about websites ranking on Google. It’s increasingly about how LLMs interpret expertise itself.
In the next post
I’m digging into the deeper layer underneath this experiment: why the LLMs appeared to recognize repeated communication patterns, semantic relationships, and thematic consistency across years of public work, not just keywords.
That part may have major implications for GEO, podcast discoverability, and how expertise gets interpreted online going forward.
Until then, give the LLM Visibility Test a go and let me know what happened.
Steph