Editor’s Note: In 2026, shrinking organic reach and autonomous search agents are changing what “visibility” even means—and press releases are being rebuilt as influence infrastructure rather than legacy copy. For CMOs and communications leaders, the challenge isn’t writing better announcements; it’s engineering distribution and credibility across the systems that shape AI search and machine-cited answers.

February! It’s the month of love! It’s the month of taxes! And, weirdly, a month of tangentially related tech?

Changes to Postmark rules

It’s tax season! If you send your tax return in by mail, you may want to drop it off a few days early. Recent changes to post office operations mean your mail

With artificial intelligence, legal professionals are getting much more done in a day. But for law firms that bill primarily by the hour, this may not bode well. As lawyers complete their work faster for clients, they log fewer billable hours, which means less revenue for the firm.
Due to this conflict between efficiency and

On February 10, 2026, Judge Jed Rakoff of the Southern District of New York ruled in United States v. Heppner that documents generated through a consumer version of Anthropic’s Claude AI were not protected by the attorney-client privilege or the work-product doctrine under the circumstances presented. The decision appears to be the first to squarely address privilege and work product claims arising from a non-lawyer’s use of a consumer-grade insecure, non-enterprise AI tool for “legal research,” as well as the potential consequences of inputting privileged information (provided to an individual by counsel) into an AI tool. However, putting the novelty of the AI context aside, Judge Rakoff grounded his analysis in traditional privilege principles: that disclosure of privileged communications to a third party in circumstances that undermine confidentiality (here, the corporation operating the AI tool) may result in waiver. And that an AI tool is just that – a tool, not an attorney. Accordingly, this decision reinforces the importance of only using properly secured AI tools with confidential or privileged information and for decisions about using AI in the privileged context to be made by those who best appreciate the risks involved: i.e., lawyers.