Google changed what it thinks is important: Here’s what you need to know (October)

Google wants humans involved, and it will reward you for the effort

Last week, Google changed its guidance on content, particularly AI-generated or AI-assisted pieces, and it will have an impact on how successful any marketing tactics will be.

The update (dated October 1) is quite extensive, so we’ve cherry picked three.

Originality is a premium

This is not necessarily something which should have to be said, but considering the growing tsunami of generic opinions visible on social media feeds nowadays, it is probably worth reiterating.

One of the ways platforms are tackling AI Slop is by assessing how novel the piece of content is. Google has explicitly said it will favour unique perspectives and original thought, rather than the conveyor belt of AI-generated content, which is simply inferring opinion from elsewhere, and repurposing as a standalone piece.

For marketing and comms professionals, this move highlights the importance of genuine editorial experience to create content which prioritises originality, as opposed to simply regurgitating the marketing matrix and corporate objectives.

One way to do this is by giving executives voice. Not only does it humanise the brand for the audience, but it also feeds into the reward system Google is prioritising. Many have an opinion, but unless it is converted into content and distributed, that opinion stays inside your organisation and does not work to achieve your commercial objectives.

Human editorial oversight is being explicitly reinforced

This is where the original promise of AI has been conflated into something new. AI was designed to support human productivity, not replace human effort.

Google’s updated guidance reinforces the importance of meaningful editorial oversight, particularly when AI is involved in content production. Hallucinations, poor sourcing and generic language are all potential symptoms of content being produced without enough thought, expertise or scrutiny.

This is directly linked to what The Content Store has been advocating for – AI has a role, but it is not a tool to replace humans. Editorial judgment, contextual relevance, human experience, all these things matter and cannot be replicated by what is still a maturing technology.

More does not equal better

Google has warned that the quantity of content will have an impact on prioritisation, but it is a bit of a nuanced point.

More content is fine when it adds value and justifies producing a standalone piece. If changing the headline, picture and a couple of words in the body is deemed enough, you may find yourself surprised. Google engineers are not calling-it-in, they know what they are doing.

Where this matters is the editorial judgment on how to create differing standalone pieces which are linked by the same Red Thread.

Coming to the same conclusion, but offering an argument tailored to a specific audience, region or industry, is good marketing. The AI conveyor belt with superficial changes is not.

What this all means

This update appears to be building on previous attempts to tackle spam, but also targeting the rise of AI Slop specifically, that is not necessarily a bad thing.

Good content creates impact, and Google recognises that. If you want to create something cheap and quickly, there is usually a price to pay, and Google has just shown you what it is:

Content and websites violating the guidelines may be pushed down search results
Serious offenders could be removed entirely

But there is also the other side. Google is creating a system which prioritises helpful, reliable, original content created for people with meaningful oversight from people. Distinctive analysis and opinions will be rewarded.