Disruptive algorithm updates have shaken up Google’s SERPs over the years.
Remember Penguin, Panda, Caffeine and May Day?
Google’s updates typically begin as a narrow attempt to solve an individual problem, then broaden and gain names before being absorbed into the core ranking algorithms.
Despite the dynamic nature of search, Google’s commitment to tackling spammy web content remains unchanged.
Understanding Google’s search psyche becomes crucial as AI revolutionizes search and our lives.
Let’s examine the common threads between Google’s past and present updates to understand the actions and content that Google values.
Google Search Generative Experience vs. Knowledge Panel
This is perhaps the most obvious comparison we can draw. These two updates are broadly similar in how those in the search community reacted to them.
Recently, we have Google’s Search Generative Experience preview. We also have various articles from Google, bringing SGE and Bard (Google’s AI product) closer together.
Here is one of the animated previews which Google has shared:
The preview sparked panic among SEOs, as it indicated limited space for organic search links.
Search marketers feared that SEO (and potentially paid search) would become obsolete without clickable elements.
It wasn’t long before language became apocalyptic, and people started declaring search to be dead again:
A certain FAQ update started blowing up on Twitter, as Google documentation confirmed that Bard “rarely lists citations and links to content creators.” (More coverage from Barry Schwartz’s report)
Search professionals were concerned that Google would effectively stop delivering traffic to the broader web with fewer organic link placements and a lack of direct citations.
To me, that seems unlikely. Google’s entire revenue model is based on pay-per-click advertising.
That’s not to say that things couldn’t work differently. (i.e., Pay to have your brand referenced more often by an AI within more relevant chats – forget keywords!)
However, it takes time for such technology to spread globally.
Hence, I wouldn’t expect Google’s advertising model to change overnight.
We’ll undergo a period of adaptation to new technologies.
Our roles may involve more prompt crafting and shifting ad approaches using AI recommendations instead of keywords and links.
Despite changes, search will continue, albeit in a significantly different way.
Does this ring a bell? In 2012, Google launched knowledge panels.
This relied upon Google’s previously released Knowledge Graph (a behind-the-scenes system to contextualize information and group it into entity form) to extract specific information directly into search results instead of linking to the hosting webpage.
Since then, it has gone through many evolutions.
When the knowledge panel was first released, it looked roughly like this:
So, there were still plenty of organic links. But it was a huge visual shift, giving more search real estate (especially within informational query spaces) to pure information.
These days, knowledge panels can take a variety of forms:
There’s no need to click the citational link in many cases as knowledge panels provide the required information directly.
While knowledge panels may not always be as aggressive, they often nullify the need to click, especially for highly informational queries.
Knowledge panels were released in 2012, before AI became mainstream. Even then, there were many SEOs forecasting doom and gloom.
But here we are, 11 years later, and search still exists.
Google still delivers traffic to websites.
SEO isn’t dead.
So just as the knowledge panel, even in its more advanced form, failed to kill search, I suspect the same will hold true for Google’s SGE and Bard deployments.
Still, that doesn’t guarantee a golden future.
We all need to adapt, and there might be a decrease in clicks that we must manage or find alternative advertising methods.
However, AI isn’t a disastrous meteor ending our careers.
Just as the era of information retrieval (IR) came before SEO, SEO will evolve into something else.
Get the daily newsletter search marketers rely on.
Google Helpful Content vs. Panda
Here, we can draw a very obvious comparison.
In August 2022, Google began talking about a “Helpful Content” system, which had the following aims:
Many SEOs will recognize much of the above from Google’s legacy Panda updates.
Google still often references the update by name.
This 2011 blog post provides insights into the update’s initial release notes (even though Panda wasn’t referred to by its name then).
Google’s aim remains unchanged: they rely on a useful search engine for revenue.
If “created for SEO” content dominates search results, users face more spam, leading to decreased usage and ad revenue loss.
It’s shocking how similar the rhetoric is between Panda’s original release and the Helpful Content update.
The tone of voice has changed somewhat, but the key points remain the same:
- Google is aware that a healthy web ecosystem benefits them. While you may not trust Google or any large corporation, it is in their best interests not to eat their own audience (something that will remain true as they deploy AI).
- Produce helpful, useful content for end users. Don’t produce content for the sake of SEO (or search engines).
- Google tries to keep an eye on how drastically individual updates impact their collective query spaces. Google tends to progress cautiously and incrementally, giving us time to adapt.
- Users have tasks to complete when they are online. How does your content help users to complete their objectives? Focus on that when producing your content.
- Even with AI’s power, Google needs human-produced content to learn from the web. Without it, there will be no new material for their AI to learn from and online information/news will stagnate, rendering Google’s search engine useless.
And if you think that AI will eventually learn from itself and eliminate the need for human-produced content, initial tests in that area have not been successful:
It seems that when AI feeds off itself, the integrity of the produced material rapidly degrades.
Examining common threads between the past and the present
When disruptive technologies like AI emerge, doom-sayers quickly gain traction declaring, “Search will be over, SEO is dead!”
However, we can gain a more realistic interpretation by comparing the rhetoric around past and present Google updates.
This approach helps us avoid panic and align with Google’s long-term vision for our sites, content, and links.
It enables us to strategically plan and adapt our businesses amid years of disruption.
Doom-sayer views about rapid technological permeation are often inaccurate, as history shows widespread adoption takes time.
AI is simply another new frontier to explore, and with the global economy in such poor shape, one that is desperately needed.
Contributing authors are invited to create content for Search Engine Land and are chosen for their expertise and contribution to the search community. Our contributors work under the oversight of the editorial staff and contributions are checked for quality and relevance to our readers. The opinions they express are their own.
