Asking ChatGPT, Perplexity or Gemini in Taiwan in Chinese, it often cites sources that are not your official network, but rather the last two to three years of Dcard, PTT post or a local news that you have not heard. The type of inquiry almost determines the composition of the source: the interpretation of the term and the question of fact are biased towards Wikipedia and the press, while the comment, recommendation and comparison are dominated by the forum and user content. Let's figure out which source is the highest on your target, more useful than tracking who you are in Google.
That's the source, not the ranking.
Traditional SEO is staring at the keyword at the number. There's no "first name" in AI's answer, and it's a list of a dozen sources that you read at a time, synthesizes a phrase, and a few references to determine whether you've been seen. When we set up Brand Radar's tracking for B2B clients, the first step was not to mention the brand several times, but to open up every target question and see which domain AI had read, whom it had written, who it had put in the quote. When the angle is changed, the preferred target is changed from "my page" to "the sources that AI will read."
Taiwan AI
The following distribution comes from our long-term observation of the inspection of Taiwan's B2B and its cost-related queries, not a precise estimate of a public report; the true scale will follow the problem, the model version, the month. But the direction is stable enough to plan the content.
- Wikipedia (Chinese): The most stable of all sources is almost inevitable in the definition of terms, corporate background, and the concept of industry.
- News media (central, economic daily, digital and technological media): The main sources of reference for current events, market size, fund-raising and purchases, and policy issues.
- Dcard: The issue of reputations, jobs, spending and other issues is a high source, especially for young people.
- PTT: Despite this decline, the old text is still heavily indexed and is frequently quoted in 3C, finance, and professional tailings.
- Mobile01: The heavyweight source of hardware, equipment, and corporate shopping evaluations often emerges.
- Brand officials’ network and .gov.tw: are considered authority by models, but are usually quoted only when the issue is clearly directed to the institution or the brand.
Why is the forum and user content so high?
Looking at web traffic alone, Dcard, PTT, Mobile01 may not have won large media, but it is often higher in AI references than in format. Model preferences can be drawn directly from first-hand experience: real people use a specific description of a tool, a discussion string that is both negative and negative, and a question-and-answer structure, which is the nature of the forum. An official web page with a "business-led solution" has almost no reference value to the model; a Dcard post says, "After our company's entry, the response time for the client's service has been reduced from one day to two hours," which is exactly what AI wants.
Factual question: news and Wikipedia's home
As long as there is a need for "what" and "how many" and "years", the source of the quote will clearly fall to Wikipedia and news. This type of problem model is based on a statement that can be verified, dated and clearly sourced, while the forum's personal experience has been reduced. For B2B brands, this means two things: that the company’s Chinese wiki article is absent from a factual response if it is over or non-existent; and that the continued production of content that is quoted in the press or is itself newsworthy, such as market figures, industry surveys, famous points, is the method by which a few can be pushed into such a reference.
Official net and .gov.tw: Authority is not the same as quoted
Many people think that official networks and government domains have a high level of power and should be cited first, and that models actually have a conditional trust in them. .gov.tw has a high percentage of legal, tax, and public data issues, which are almost non-existent as soon as they leave. The same goes for brand officials: when asking "A's price-fixing scheme" about what's good for "A's and B's," the answer is almost entirely based on third-party evaluations and forums, and the content of the official's own words cannot be quoted. The authority decides under what subject, not all.
Taiwan.
- First, group the target: divide the query to be followed into two sets of facts and ratings, and the source of the advantage is completely different.
- Complementing the reality: confirm that the Chinese wikis are correct and produce newsable and usable data, such as home research, famous numbers, industry views.
- Operating third-party volume: In high-citation sources such as Dcard, PTT, Mobile01, the actual user’s experience is left behind, not the content of the product.
- Rewrite the online language of the official: replace the term "predominant industry" with a specific, imputable, digital sentence, so that the content of the website itself is equipped with the value to be extracted.
- Periodical retest: Quoting sources changes with models, tracking is a continuous action, not a one-time audit.
Taiwan's AI quotes are different from the English world, and the weight of these local sources is much greater than most brands expect. If you think about what you look like in the AI answer, you should run the target question over and see who reads it behind each topic. To know where your brand appears in these references and what's missing, you can expect a 30-minute GEO diagnosis, and we'll take a sample of your real concerns and look at the gaps.
