Why accessible content is AI-ready content
In this webinar
Everyone's talking about AI search platform visibility – but most teams are fixing the wrong things. They're chasing prompts and platform tricks when the real problem is much simpler: if AI can't read your content, it can't cite it. And the rules for what AI can read are the same rules that have governed accessibility for years.
In this practical session, we'll show you how accessibility and AI search platform visibility are the same challenge – and how fixing one fixes the other.
Video: Why accessible content is AI-ready content. Captions and transcript available on playback.
Why accessible content is AI-ready content
Press play to watch the webinar on demand.
Transcript: Why accessible content is AI-ready content
Poll results

A) Yes – we have a clear priority list – 46%
B) We know there are issues but aren't sure what to fix first – 29%
C) We don't know how big the problem is yet – 23%
D) We know what needs fixing but don't have the resources to act – 3%
A) Very confident – we're using them to their full potential – 22%
B) We have tools but we're not getting full value from them – 44%
C) We rely on one super user and it doesn't scale – 7%
D) We don't have a dedicated accessibility tool – 26%
AI visibility report
Is your content invisible in AI search platforms?
Get a free AI visibility report of your content. See where you stand today and get clear recommendations on next steps.
Webinar Q&A
A few common ones stand out:
Content locked in PDFs - AI can’t reliably read PDFs. Important content should live on well-structured HTML web pages, with PDFs as supplements if needed.
Vague or marketing-heavy language - content that sounds good but doesn't actually say anything specific. AI search platforms are looking for clear, direct answers to questions. If your content doesn't provide them, a competitor's will.
Inconsistent information across pages - if multiple pages on your site say slightly different things about the same topic, AI doesn't know which version to trust. Consistency reinforces authority.
Information spread too thin - if content about a single topic is scattered across many pages, AI struggles to piece it together. Consolidate so each key topic has a clear, comprehensive home.
Yes - there are certain types of content that are harder for AI search platforms to interpret reliably, particularly when meaning is not expressed in structured, text-based formats.
- PDFs - AI can't reliably read PDFs. The lack of consistent structure makes it harder to interpret and chunk the information correctly. Design-heavy brochures and form-style PDFs are common problem cases.
- Images and infographics - AI is not always reliable at extracting structured meaning from images, compared to text. If the information only exists visually, it may not be consistently interpreted. Alt text helps, but complex diagrams, flowcharts, or data visualizations should also have a text or HTML equivalent.
- Video and audio - AI search platforms typically rely on transcripts or written summaries to accurately interpret the content. Without them, the information is effectively much harder to access and use.
- Content loaded dynamically via JavaScript - Content that only appears after user interaction (such as tabs or accordions) may not always be reliably discovered or indexed, depending on how it is rendered.
The common thread is that AI search platforms are most effective when information is presented in clear, structured text. Anything that relies solely on visual, audio, or interaction-based delivery should have a text-based equivalent to ensure it can be reliably understood.
Start with the pages that matter most to your audience and your business goals. Look at which pages get the most traffic and which ones support your most important user journeys - if you're in higher education, that might be program pages, financial aid, or tuition. If you're a business, it might be your core service or product pages.
Your SEO data can help here - it'll show you which pages get the most traffic, and also where people are dropping off, which can be a sign the content isn't working well enough.
Beyond that, look for where the biggest problems are concentrated. Sometimes making a few high-impact fixes across your worst-performing pages will move the needle more than incremental improvements to pages that are already in reasonable shape.
There's no single right answer - it depends on how much content you're publishing and how quickly things change in your organization.
As a general guide, audit regularly and make it part of your ongoing workflow rather than a one-off project. For teams publishing a lot of new content, monthly or even weekly makes sense. For organizations with mostly evergreen content, quarterly is a reasonable starting point.
The key is that it's recurring. Even if your site isn't changing frequently, what makes good accessible and AI-ready content does shift over time. Match your audit cadence to your content output, and build a repeatable process around it - audit, prioritize, fix, track, repeat.
They're not in conflict - but tone of voice shouldn't come at the expense of clarity.
Plain language doesn't mean stripping your content of personality. It means making sure your message is specific and easy to understand. You can still sound like your organization while being direct. What you want to avoid is letting brand voice become a substitute for actual information - flowery or aspirational copy that doesn't clearly answer the question a visitor (or an AI) is looking to answer.
The practical balance: start with your own people creating content in your voice, then check it against what AI search platforms can actually extract. If an AI can't give a clear, accurate summary of what your page says, the language probably needs to be more specific - regardless of how on-brand it sounds.
Tone of voice matters - especially if you want to stand out from competitors. Don't lose that in the push toward AI readiness. But make sure the substance is there alongside it.
ARIA labels can have a positive impact on AI readability - but only if they're implemented correctly.
ARIA feeds into the accessibility tree - the same structure screen readers use to understand a page. This kind of structure can also help AI search platforms interpret your content.
The risk is overuse. Many HTML elements already carry built-in meaning - a
Accordions aren't inherently a problem - it depends on how they're built. If the content inside your accordions is present in the page's HTML when the page first loads and is just visually collapsed, AI crawlers can read it fine. Most major AI search platforms don't look at what's visible on screen - they read the code, the same way a screen reader does.
The problem arises when accordion content is only injected by JavaScript after a user clicks to expand it. Most AI crawlers don't execute JavaScript, so if the content isn't in the page source on initial load, it's effectively invisible to them.