Inside Grokipedia and how it sources information about FTSE 100 companies

Grokipedia, at first glance, feels like a direct descendant of Wikipedia: open, sprawling, and covers 92 of the FTSE 100. However, there are some distinct differences.

Elon Musk has launched Grokipedia v0.1, an AI-powered encyclopaedia that takes on Wikipedia. Grokipedia, at first glance, feels like a direct descendant of Wikipedia: open, sprawling, and covers 92 of the FTSE 100. There are some distinct differences: the absence of community conversation, unusually deep historical analysis, and uncertainty – due to a lack of editing history – of how sources were decided.

I analysed all 500+ sources Grokipedia uses to build the pages of FTSE 100 and discovered:

• 36% from institutional and regulatory websites such as academic journals, governments, and legal websites. It’s these sources that contribute extensive depth to articles and are responsible for flagging disputes and other historical issues.

• 35% from official company websites and investor relations pages. These are clearly the most reliable sources and show the importance of an updated and optimised website presence.

• 29% are earned media, ranging from specialized trade press, newswire-based reporting (such as a financial update in Reuters), and international media. Notably, 99% of the sources are in English and the content referenced is publicly accessible (no paywalls).

There was no evidence of social media references or sources from paid media sources. This was a surprise to our team, given news coverage about the supposedly equal weighting given to social media sources Vs reliable mainstream.

Where there are challenges

• Attribution dilution: For FTSE 100s, the sources are blended, which can blur the line between official facts and third-party commentary (e.g. an academic or legal text may come from a detractor, but is equally weighted with a corporate or government source).

• Data decay: It’s not clear how frequently links are verified, checked for bias or if they’re still live. Like other AI platforms, Grokipedia often links deep within websites to pages that can either be out of date or removed.

• Secondary interpretation: For key metrics, Grokipedia sometimes relies on financial aggregators rather than primary filings. This introduces the risk of minor inaccuracies or misinterpretations being amplified.

• No neutral point of view: Especially for companies in geopolitically sensitive sectors, Grokipedia’s penchant for deep historical context means that old controversies are permanently embedded in the corporate profile.

What this means for communications professionals

The first step is to understand how you’re being reflected and the sources being used to inform that image. Do everything you can to manage the sources Grokipedia relies upon, such as your website and media profile, which means taking an integrated approach to communications.

Grokipedia is new, likely to grow given its financial backing and brand, but this version will never replace Wikipedia’s authority as the ‘database of the internet’. It’s an aggregator, and truth be told, one that relies on Wikipedia for its content.