Meta is getting smarter about who sees your ads, and may start charging some users for the privilege

Meta just taught its algorithm to read the room.

Your CTR might’ve noticed: Meta’s new ranking model now reads more signals about each user in real time, making your ad targeting sharper without much system complaint.

Meta says that since launching in Q4 2025 there were:

• +3% increase in ad conversions
• +5% increase in click-through rates for targeted users

The model now matches ads to users based on context and intent, not just demographics.

In theory, your existing campaigns could perform better with zero changes on your end. And the gains should compound as Meta keeps refining the model.

Meta’s AI is taking requests: Type a description of your ideal audience into the new Describe Your Audience feature, and Meta’s AI suggests relevant interests and behaviors to match it.

Type a prompt under 2,000 characters, and it will surface relevant interests and behaviors with explanations for why each was suggested.

Inputs still remain audience suggestions in most cases, so don’t expect a dramatic shift in control. But if you’re running a performance goal that supports hard audience restrictions, this could surface options worth testing that you’d otherwise have missed.

Instagram is getting a premium tier: Meta is testing Instagram Plus in Mexico, Japan, and the Philippines, coming in at roughly $1–$2 USD per month.

Features include anonymous Story viewing, expanded audience lists, and boosted Story visibility aimed squarely at everyday users.

It’s separate from Meta Verified and still early days. But, a growing base of paying users is a vote of confidence in the platform, and that’s rarely bad news for advertisers.

Watch how adoption develops before adjusting strategy.

What actually gets indexed and what gets left behind?

Apparently, Google isn’t a fan of long reads.

It prefers pamphlets: Gary Illyes recently broke down exactly how Googlebot handles page size.

Here are the highlights:

• HTML pages are capped at 2MB. Whatever sits beyond that threshold doesn’t get fetched, rendered, or indexed. It simply doesn’t exist to Google.
• PDFs get 64MB. All other crawlers without a specified limit default to 15MB.
• External files each get their own 2MB counter. JavaScript, CSS, and other referenced resources are fetched separately, so moving heavy code out of your HTML means Google spends its 2MB on your content, not your clutter.

Once Googlebot collects those bytes, they get handed off to the Web Rendering Service (WRS), which runs JavaScript and CSS just like a modern browser.

This helps Google understand your page’s final, fully-rendered state.

The practical fix: Keep your HTML lean, load the most critical elements near the top of the document, and keep tabs on your server logs.

If your landing pages are bloated, your structured data might be getting cut off before Google even sees it.

And so, rich results, product schema, and campaign-critical metadata could all be missing from search. Tighter pages mean more of your intentional SEO work will bear fruit.

Where do AI Overviews cite from?

Ahrefs data shows AI Overviews have cut clicks to top-ranking content by up to 58%.

Which means that getting cited in those AI-generated answers is now a non-negotiable if you want to stay visible online.

But what actually determines whether Google cites your page? Tarek Reslan explains…

A structured analysis across 100 AIO citations mapped exactly where on each source page the cited snippet appeared. The findings are hard to ignore:

• 55% of citations came from the first 30% of a page.
• Only 21% came from the bottom 40%.
• The 10–20% part alone outperformed every other segment combined.

What this means: If your main takeaway lives halfway down because you built up to it with context, AI systems are going to continuously miss it.

And this isn’t a Google-only pattern. Kevin Indig’s analysis of 1.2M search results found that around 44% of ChatGPT citations also come from the first 30% of a document.

Two different chatbots, yet same structural bias toward early answers.

The instinct to warm readers up before delivering the insight is deeply embedded in content marketing. Hooks, narrative arcs, problem-agitate-solve. It’s all optimized for humans.

AI citation behavior doesn’t care about a narrative arc. It rewards definitional clarity early.

There is one exception worth flagging: FAQ sections. A meaningful share of bottom-of-page citations came from FAQ blocks.

Each question-answer pair functions like a mini-article with its own clear answer upfront. If you’re building these as an afterthought, rethink that.

The bottom line: The fix isn’t “write shorter content.” It’s “answer earlier.”

Audit your top-traffic pages. Find where your primary answer actually appears. If it’s below the 30% mark, that’s your first optimization target.

Rankings without citations are increasingly hollow, and the data is telling us exactly what to do about it.

Read the full breakdown here.

Settling for mediocrity is a B2B content killer

Is B2B content still the heavyweight champion of marketing? Or is it starting to look a bit winded?

At the moment, most marketers are still seeing the glass as half-full. Or at least “somewhat” full:

This recent data shows that 59% of B2B marketers find their content efforts effective. Specifically, 12% report being “highly effective” by exceeding their goals, while 47% are meeting most of their targets.

However, a significant 31% are hovering in the “neutral” zone with mixed results, which suggests that a third of the industry is still searching for a winning formula.

Only 10% admit to falling short or failing to meet their goals entirely.

What we think: While the majority find success, the high percentage of neutral responses reflects a struggle to stand out in a saturated market.

Food for thought: The most dangerous place in marketing is the middle. Those in the “neutral” zone may be in a worse position than the 10% who are failing.

Failure creates urgency. Neutral creates complacency. If your content is generating mild engagement with no clear business impact, you’re burning budget with a smile on your face.

Audit content that’s bringing mixed results first.

Want more insights like these?

Pro members get weekly B2B strategy breakdowns, what’s actually converting, and how to audit your way out of the middle. $349/year covers your whole team (up to 10 people).