R6 — Cite Pew as the AI-prevalence anchor; cite vendor trackers (Semrush / BrightEdge / Conductor) as a range; never cite a single vendor as the level

Rule: In any Candid material that cites AI-overview prevalence, cite Pew's independent 18% (March 2025) as the anchor and the vendor trackers as a range (16–48% across Semrush / Conductor / BrightEdge). Never cite a single vendor number as "the" level.

Why: Vendor trackers have a SEO-platform incentive to show large numbers; different keyword samples, "tracked queries" vs all queries, and niche / long-tail inclusion drive the 16–48% spread (Reconciliation: the 16% / 25% / 48% AI-prevalence gap is largely definitional — different keyword samples, "tracked queries" vs all queries, niche / long-tail inclusion). The direction (rising) is consistent across every source; the level needs the anchor + range treatment (GAP — AI Overview prevalence has no single authoritative number; independent (Pew 18% Mar 2025) vs vendor (16–48%, 2025–26) figures diverge by definition and sample).

How to apply:

• Default citation pattern: "Pew (independent, Mar 2025): 18% of Google searches produced an AI summary; vendor trackers across 2025–2026 put the range at 16–48% depending on sample."
• This is editorial-discipline ([[editorial-discipline]]) for AI-prevalence specifically; the same logic applies to any "rising metric measured by vendors who sell related tooling."