For decades, PR worked by placing stories in the media, knowing people would read them and form opinions based on what they saw. That connection between coverage and understanding was relatively straightforward.
Today, that pathway is less direct. People still care about news bulletins, but many now get the full story from a single AI-generated answer instead of reading multiple articles.
PR is no longer just about securing a mention or an online link; it’s also about shaping what AI uses to explain your story.
We’ve watched these changes happen and compiled four PR trends that will define 2026.
In 2026, people will consume information more by asking than by searching.
Search engines, AI tools and social platforms have been increasingly providing direct answers to questions through featured snippets, AI summaries or in-feed explanations without the need to click or visit a website.
This is what’s known as zero-click search.
People still value traditional media and still encounter stories through newspapers, TV, radio and online outlets. But when they want to quickly understand an issue, a product or a company, they often don’t read multiple articles or reports. They get the answer and move on.
So what does this mean for PR?
PR needs to adapt by measuring success differently. With change in behaviour comes a need for a change in expectations. Expect traffic decline to websites. Expect a shift in what “matters”. In 2026, PR’s success relies not only on media coverage but also in how that media coverage and other PR activity contribute to influencing AI-generated answers.
A quoted press release, a reference to media coverage, a borrowed paragraph from your website, blogs or knowledge centre. They can all shape the conversion without you knowing about it, because there are no clicks to prove it.
2026 is the year when you may get “coverage” (or citations) without knowing you did.
If zero-click search changes where people get answers, this trend changes who is shaping them.
AI tools are now authoritative voices that people trust. Unlike a news cycle that moves on in 24 hours, AI has a perfect, permanent memory. It pulls from old press releases, Reddit threads, and Glassdoor reviews to build a profile of your brand.
Recent research from Medianet, ‘Opening the Black Box,’ shows that how a brand appears in AI answers often differs from its media image. A crisis that was "resolved" in the papers two years ago might still be framed as a current "risk" by AI if the digital trail wasn't properly managed.
For PR and comms teams, it’s no longer enough to just monitor coverage. The real work is engaging and responding. Regular checks of how AI describes your organisation to identify where outdated or unclear narratives persist are now key. And so is publishing fresh, authoritative content to "update" the AI's memory.
However, this isn't about "tricking the system." Credibility cannot be bought. AI does not respond to ad spend or campaigns. It reflects credibility earned through consistent messaging, trusted third-party voices and clear accountability.
After a flurry of AI-generated content flooded feeds, websites and social media, 2026 is the year in which we push back on AI Slop. As AI will continue to take on the heavy work of summarising and explaining information but in order to do, it must decide which sources are reliable, which voices carry authority, and which information is safe to repeat.
Trust is no longer just a "nice-to-have" brand sentiment; it is an ‘LLM’ filter. AI systems are programmed to prioritise information that carries "credibility cues”, such as clear sourcing, named experts, consistent facts and trusted third parties. Websites, knowledge centres and FAQs play a quieter but important role as long-term reference points that AI systems return to over time. When these signals are weak or missing, content is more likely to be ignored or treated cautiously.
This has also made ethical transparency a mandatory standard. If a journalist or an AI system suspects a story is purely "AI-generated slop" without human oversight or accountability, it is quickly downgraded.
In practice, this reinforces core PR fundamentals. Quotes from named executives and recognised spokespeople matter more than ever. Consistency is also vital; if your LinkedIn, your website, and your press releases tell different stories, AI will flag your information as unreliable and stop surfacing it.
As discovery, trust and reputation change, what counts as success in PR is changing too.
The old way of proving PR value was showing a thick folder of media mentions. Today, leadership teams are asking a different question: did it make a difference?
We are moving from counting outputs (how much we did) to measuring outcomes (what actually happened). Instead of just clip counts or vanity metrics, teams need insights that show what drives impact, flag risk early, and inform decisions. Findings from Medianet’s State of Australian Corporate Affairs report show many corporate affairs and communications teams still struggle to prove ROI. As expectations rise, teams are under pressure to move from influence to authority - one that can explain impact, not just activity. Tools like Medianet’s REAL Impact Score evaluate media coverage based on Reach, Engagement, Authority and Leverage.
Tracking how messages move from press releases to media coverage to AI-generated summaries shows what lands, what shifts perception, and where meaning is reinforced or lost.
Public relations now sits at the intersection of media, LLMs, data and trust.
While the tools have changed, the core mission hasn't: PR is about clarity and credibility. As AI takes over the "sense-making," human judgment becomes more valuable, not less. AI can summarise a fact, but it can’t navigate nuance, ethics, or complex human relationships.