
The State of Google SEO & AI Today: What Do You Think?
• And, here's what I think, based on how they wrote that report and how they designed their two research studies:
Well I don't know about you, but when it comes to Google's SERP algos -- I for one tend to trust what they themselves publicly announce and consistently publish.
• Meanwhile, I tend to have a healthy suspicion on groups that clearly have a vested commercial interest in contradicting what Google's saying.

More so if that group publishes a poorly executed research study that doesn't factor in what the algo designers themselves say they're consistently implementing over the years.
• For instance, A group with a clear commercial interest in having more content publishers believe they should check their AI-generated content for "human" or "AI" percentages shouldn't design nor publish a research study that focuses solely on AI-generatedness as an end-all-be-all correlation metric for de-indexing.
• That's because the same group should've focused more on spamminess as a metric with more weight, then analyzing results to scientifically find out if any measurable correlation exists between AI-generatedness and de-indexing.
• Especially if the algo designers themselves stated that spamminess, helpfulness, timeliness and relevant value for readers have always been their ranking metrics.

Supplemental Info
• Here's what Google publicly announced last year (Feb 8, 2023), which they have NEVER recanted as of today:
QUOTE:
• At Google, we've long believed in the power of AI to transform the ability to deliver helpful information.
• In this post, we'll share more about how AI-generated content fits into our long-standing approach to show helpful content to people on Search.
Rewarding high-quality content, however it is produced
• Our focus on the quality of content, rather than how content is produced, is a useful guide that has helped us deliver reliable, high quality results to users for years.
• For example, about 10 years ago, there were understandable concerns about a rise in mass-produced yet human-generated content.
• No one would have thought it reasonable for us to declare a ban on all human-generated content in response.
• Instead, it made more sense to improve our systems to reward quality content, as we did.
Focusing on rewarding quality content has been core to Google since we began.
• It continues today, including through our ranking systems designed to surface reliable information and our helpful content system.
• The helpful content system was introduced last year to better ensure those searching get content created primarily for people, rather than for search ranking purposes.
How automation can create helpful content
• When it comes to automatically generated content, our guidance has been consistent for years.
• Using automation--including AI--to generate content with the primary purpose of manipulating ranking in search results is a violation of our spam policies.
• Google has many years of experience dealing with automation being used in an attempt to game search results.
• Our spam-fighting efforts-- including our SpamBrain system -- will continue, however spam is produced.
This said, it's important to recognize that NOT ALL use of automation, including AI generation, is spam.
• Automation has long been used to generate helpful content, such as sports scores, weather forecasts, and transcripts.
AI has the ability to power new levels of expression and creativity, and to serve as a critical tool to help people create great content for the web.
• This is in line with how we've always thought about empowering people with new technologies.
• We'll continue taking this responsible approach, while also maintaining a high bar for information quality and the overall helpfulness of content on Search.
Our advice for creators considering AI-generation
• As explained, however content is produced, those seeking success in Google Search should be looking to produce original, high-quality, people-first content demonstrating qualities E-E-A-T.
• Creators can learn more about the concept of E-E-A-T on our Creating helpful, reliable, people-first content help page.
• In addition, we've updated that page with some guidance about thinking in terms of Who, How, and Why in relation to how content is produced.
• Evaluating your content in this way, whether you're using AI-generated content or not, will help you stay on course with what our systems seek to reward.
Posted by Danny Sullivan and Chris Nelson, on behalf of the Google Search Quality team
/QUOTE
source = https://developers.google.com/search...nerate-content
Additional Data
• Here's a report with qualitative data that was published by SEMRush on Jan 31 this ear ...
QUOTE:
• The study analyzed over 2,600 businesses globally providing critical insights into the current state and future trends of AI in content marketing.
• 67% of businesses already use AI for content marketing and SEO, and 78% are satisfied with the results.
Key Takeaways
** 65% of businesses generate better SEO results thanks to AI.
** 67% also see an improvement in content quality when using AI.
** 68% get a higher content marketing ROI due to AI.
** 37% of companies that don't use AI don't understand how it works.
** 93% review their AI-generated content before publishing it.
** The majority of consumers tend to prefer AI-generated copy.
• In other words, businesses using AI tools report higher effectiveness in their content marketing efforts and better results in attracting organic traffic.
/QUOTE
source = https://www.semrush.com/news/288870-...ends-for-2024/

⢠Chief Machine Learning Engineer @ ARIA Research (Sydney, AU)
⢠Lead GenAI SEO Campaign Engineer @ Kiteworks, Inc. (SF, US)
⢠Chief Machine Learning Engineer @ ARIA Research (Sydney, AU)
⢠Lead GenAI SEO Campaign Engineer @ Kiteworks, Inc. (SF, US)
⢠Chief Machine Learning Engineer @ ARIA Research (Sydney, AU)
⢠Lead GenAI SEO Campaign Engineer @ Kiteworks, Inc. (SF, US)