Posted in: AI

Google’s Fight Against AI Content: A Deep Dive

4 Jan

It is common for many content writers at present to generate article with the help of AI tools. Some of them do not even bother to make minor changes also.

However, they should know that Google is directing its quality raters to watch out for pages with main content created with the help of automotive or AI tools. Such content will now earn the lowest rating. This change was part of the January 2025 update of the search quality rater guidelines. Let us now learn about some of the most significant changes from the latest version.

Google adds a new definition: generative AI

After its latest search quality rater guidelines updates, Google has included a definition and framing for generative AI for the first time. The document of Google clearly mentions that it is an useful tool but can be abused if used by wrong individuals.

You can find this definition in section 2.1 (important definitions). In this section, it is clearly mentioned that “Generative AI is a type of machine learning model that can take what it has learned from the examples it has been provided to create new content, such as texts, images, music and code. Different tools leverage these models to create generative AI content. Generative AI can be a helpful tool for content creation, but like any tool, it can be misused.”

Google clarifies the difference between low and lowest ratings

This section explains rater guidance for when the content is not bad enough to get a lowest rating but still deserves a low rating. There is a clear difference between the two. In case of low rating, some parts of the main content (MC) is reused but there is a minimal effort to modify it. Contrary to this, almost the entire main content is either directly copied or paraphrased, with no effort to modify it.

The search quality rater guidelines have given some examples of reframed content, some of which have been provided below:

• Social media reposts with some additional comments or discussion
• Pages with existing content presented in a meaningful way to the audience by adding one’s own context and perspective.

Google wants its raters to identify such content that tries to pass itself as original content but lacks the qualities required for giving a proper user experience.

Google includes ‘filler’ content

This new section is about filler content, which is a poor quality, low-relevance content created with little effort. Although it may visually dominate the page, it will fail to serve its purpose.

In simple words, fillers may artificially inflate the content, thus creating a page that appears rich but lacks valuable content. This means that even if the content is not harmful, it can earn a low rating if it makes it difficult to access truly helpful material. Those pages are especially targeted which bury useful information beneath generic introductions or bloated paragraphs. Raters have been instructed to assess how page layout and content hierarchy impacts the user’s ability to achieve their goal.

Google redefines spammy webpages

Google has made significant changes in how spammy webpages are defined. The section on auto-generated MC has been. In its place, Google has included new subsections and increased its focus on scaled, low-effort content which also comprises of potential AI misuse. The factors which align the guidelines with Google’s big search quality changes from the previous year are as follows:

1. Expired Domain Abuse: This occurs when an expired domain name is purchased and reconditioned primarily to benefit the new website owner by hosting content that provides little to no value to users.
2. Scaled Content Abuse: Creating several pieces of content with little originality and without any editing or manual curation. One of the perfect examples of an automated tool used for this is generative AI.
3. Site Reputation Abuse: This happens when existing content is published on the host site due to the host’s already established ranking signals, which it has earned from its original content. The aim of this tactic is to give a better rank to the content compared to a rank earned by it on its own.
4. Main content lacking originality: This section is dedicated to those content which has been created with little to no effort. It is often associated with generative AI and other forms of automated generation.

Now you may wonder how a rater is supposed to know whether content is AI generated or not since there is no guidance specific to this type of content. However, some new guidance have emerged around paraphrased content. It is difficult to recognize such content. Some features of paraphrased content are:

• It only contains generally known facts
• It appears as a summary of a specific content without any additional value
• Have indications of paraphrasing generative AI tools

You can understand from this article that generating an article using AI and uploading it without any significant changes will do more harm than good. You must provide some additional information to the content and give it a human touch. Then only it will rank well.