Content is king – and the algorithm is the emperor’s new clothes

[samiaseo75]

Google believes it is good at determining the quality of content. But many SEO specialists and experienced webmasters disagree. Most of them have examples that point to inferior content trumping superior content.

Any reputable company investing in quality content is likely to rank in the top few percent of quality content on the web. There will probably be competition there, too, as Google has eliminated many smaller candidates from the rankings.

From Google's perspective, Google did a great job. An business owner data incredible 96% of documents were not indexed. Some problems are obvious to humans, but difficult for a machine to detect. In practice, we have already seen examples that have led us to conclude that Google is adept at understanding which pages are "good" and which are "bad" from a technical perspective, but ineffective at distinguishing good content from great content.

This year, Google published guidelines for AI-generated content, linking to its spam policies and directly defining content that is intended to manipulate search results.

According to Google’s definition, spam is “text generated by automated processes without regard for user experience or quality.” We understand this to mean anyone using an AI system to create content without a human quality control process.

Of course, there could be cases where a generative AI system is trained on private or proprietary data. It could be configured to have a more deterministic output to reduce errors.