Where AI Industry News Actually Breaks, by Source

Across 5,142 AI industry events in Scoopkit's archive, the coverage traces back to 199 distinct source domains, and the distribution is far more lopsided than that count suggests. The single largest source carries 36.0% of all events on its own. The top 3 carry 49.4%, the top 10 carry 79.3%, and 149 of the 199 domains contributed exactly one event each. If you are building an AI news pipeline and wondering how many feeds you actually need, this is the shape of the answer: a small handful do most of the work, and the long tail is very long and very thin.

Pulled 2026-10-26 from the live production API. Sample: all 5,142 events in the archive, every category, reported between 2025-12-02 and 2026-10-26. Method: source domain parsed from each event's source_url, counted once per event. This page refreshes automatically rather than being published once.

Concentration

The 10 domains doing most of the work

The top entry is an aggregator, and that is worth being direct about rather than quietly presenting it as a primary source. An edited link digest means a large share of discovery runs through somebody else's editorial judgement about what counts as industry news. The upside is real coverage breadth from one well-maintained feed. The cost is a dependency, and it is the main reason first-party lab sources get polled separately rather than waited for.

First-party lab and vendor domains, counted together, account for 998 events, or 19.4% of the total. That is the fraction of AI industry news that comes straight from the company that made it happen. The rest arrives filtered through somebody else.

Why the long tail still matters

149 domains produced exactly one event each, and 164 produced three or fewer. Together the entire tail below the top 20 accounts for 7.2% of events.

That number invites a wrong conclusion, which is to cut the tail. The tail is where the events nobody else has come from. A single event from a niche domain is often the one that fires a webhook a customer actually cares about, and dropping sources on volume alone systematically removes the coverage that is hardest to get anywhere else. The right read is that the tail is cheap to keep, not that it is safe to cut.

What this means if you are building this yourself

Scoopkit's own configured inventory is 39 sources: 37 RSS feeds and 1 scraper, with 31 currently active, 7 paused and 1 on trial. Those 39 configured inputs produce events across 199 domains.

The gap between how many things you poll and how many domains end up represented is the useful part. Aggregator and community feeds link outward to publishers that were never configured directly, so you do not need to find and maintain a feed for every domain in that table. You need a few dozen, chosen so their outbound links cover the rest. The scraper in that inventory exists because Anthropic publishes no RSS feed at all, which is a whole problem of its own.

The maintenance load is the part that gets underestimated. A curated feed list is not a thing you assemble once.

If you would rather query the result than maintain the inputs, the free tier covers 100 requests a day against all of it.

FAQ

What counts as one source here?

The registered domain of the event's source_url, with the www. prefix stripped. Subdomains are kept separate, so aws.amazon.com and blogs.nvidia.com are counted on their own rather than folded into their parent domains.

Does the top source getting a large share mean the data depends on it?

For discovery breadth, partly yes. For the events that matter most, less so, because first-party lab sources are polled directly on their own schedule and do not wait on aggregator pickup.

Can I see which source a given event came from?

Yes, source_url is a free-tier field on every event, along with article_count. You do not need a paid key to trace an event back to where it came from.

How often does this page update?

Automatically, on a recurring basis. The figures reflect the archive as it stood on 2026-10-26.