In 2022, MF Digital warned graduate enrollment marketers that the “cookiepocalypse” was coming. (“Say Goodbye to Your Cookies”)

Google planned to eliminate third-party cookies from Chrome. We told schools to prepare for a world in which traditional audience tracking would become significantly harder.

Then, in January 2024, we published “The End of Audience Tracking As We Know It.” (https://www.mfdigi.com/the-end-of-audience-tracking-as-we-know-it/)

So we went back to see how those predictions held up.

The answer: we got the direction right, but not the timing or the exact outcome.

Google repeatedly delayed its plans and ultimately abandoned the idea of eliminating third-party cookies from Chrome altogether.

There was no cookiepocalypse.

But the broader shift we were preparing schools for absolutely happened. Safari and Firefox restricted cross-site tracking. Apple transformed mobile tracking. Privacy regulations expanded. Attribution became less precise. And first-party data became increasingly important.

One recommendation from our 2024 article has aged particularly well:

“Lean into first-party data. Data directly from your users is the gold standard.”

Why revisit this now?

Because we’re hearing a familiar kind of noise around AI search and Generative Engine Optimization (GEO).

Law schools are getting calls and emails from companies promising dramatic results and seemingly proprietary ways to influence ChatGPT, Gemini and other AI search platforms.

We think schools should be skeptical of anyone promising magic.

We also think ignoring AI search would be a mistake.

The cookie experience is instructive. Technology forecasts rarely unfold exactly as predicted. Platforms change direction. Timelines move. Certain tactics disappear.

But broad changes in user behavior can still be very real.

That is how we view AI search today.

We don’t know exactly what ChatGPT, Google, Gemini or the broader AI search ecosystem will look like several years from now. Nobody does.

What we can already see is that prospective students are increasingly getting answers from AI systems before, or sometimes instead of, visiting traditional search results.

That matters.

Schools should understand how AI systems interpret their programs, whether their content is being surfaced accurately, and how authoritative and accessible their digital content is to both people and machines.

Some of today’s GEO tactics will almost certainly look outdated in a few years.

That’s not a flaw in the strategy; it’s the nature of a rapidly evolving technology.

The lesson from the cookiepocalypse isn’t that marketers should stop looking ahead.

It’s that the exact path may change, but recognizing the direction of the market is what allows institutions to prepare before everyone else.

Looking back, Google’s implementation didn’t unfold exactly as expected. But the broader trends we highlighted, greater emphasis on privacy, reduced reliance on third-party tracking, and the growing importance of first-party data, proved to be the right strategic direction.

We believe AI search is similar.

The platforms will evolve. The tactics will mature. Some of today’s best practices will undoubtedly be replaced by better ones.

But the underlying shift is already underway.

Prospective students are increasingly turning to AI to answer their questions, evaluate programs, and narrow their choices.

That’s why we believe law schools shouldn’t wait for the AI search landscape to settle before taking it seriously.

The details will change.

The direction is already clear.