The main theses of the article:
Reward high-quality content, regardless of its production
Using automation to manipulate is a violation
The use of AI does not give the content any special advantages
A large component of EEAT is stored for now
Specifying the author's name to an stockholder database AI is probably not the best way to follow search recommendations
Google Search aims primarily to reward original and high-quality content that meets the EEAT metrics:
Expertise;
Experience;
Authority;
Reliability.
More details about the search can be found here on the website of the search system . But it should be noted that the search engine currently has nothing against content generated by artificial intelligence. The main thing is to meet EEAT metrics. They write openly about this:
"Our focus is on the quality of content, not how it's created" - Google
It should be noted that focusing on rewarding quality content has always been the foundation of Google. It must be understood that searchers should receive content created primarily for people, not for ranking in search engine results. When it comes to auto-generated content, Google's guidelines have been consistent over the years:
"Using automation, including AI, to create content with the primary purpose of manipulating search engine rankings is a violation of our spam policy" - Google
The SpamBrain system is the basis of the fight. At the same time, it is important to understand that not every use of automation, including the creation of AI, is spam. Automation has long been used to create useful content, such as sports scores and weather forecasts for example. AI has the ability to foster new levels of expression and creativity, and serve as an important tool to help people create great content.
