The updated Google Search Quality Raters guidelines last week and added an example of what it considers the “lowest quality pages.” In section 4.7 it states the only mention of using AI and writes, “The website terms of use states that “some articles” are generated by artificial intelligence and may have errors or be out of ****; there is no indication to which pages this statement applies. The information in this article is not trustworthy and is Lowest E-E-A-T.”

It goes on to explain:

The page appears to be an informational article about switching babies from breast milk to whole milk.

The bottom of the page states “Our blog is dedicated to all things related to kids and parenting – including product reviews, news, recipes, and more. We strive to provide parents with the information they need in order to make informed decisions for their families.”
However, if you read the terms of service page, you’ll find a very different description of pages on the website.

The terms of use page states “Some articles on this website might have been partially generated by an artificial intelligence language model and published for experimental and research purposes. The articles on this website are only to be used as proof of concept by Al enthusiasts and not intended for general public. We do not assume any responsibility or liability for the use or interpretation of this content for any other purpose than it was intended.

While we strive for accuracy and quality, please note that the information provided may not be entirely error-free or up-to-****. We recommend independently verifying the content and consulting with professionals for specific advice or information.”
Given the statements above, the articles on this website should be considered untrustworthy and Lowest E-E-A-T.

Here is a screenshot:

This was spotted first by Natzir who wrote on X, “Take a look at what Google has just included in the new Search Quality Rater Guidelines.”

I believe this is the only outright mention of using AI generated content? I can be wrong, but I did a quick scan of the document and did not find other mentions.

Natzir posted more:

And they have also included this other change, which is the last one, related to factuality (which I have commented on here https://t.co/qOkZz0tDOn) pic.twitter.com/IAwXMLSdf1

— Natzir (@natzir9) March 6, 2024

This does sound like something algorithms can pick up on pretty quickly. Not that what Google writes in the Search Quality Raters guidelines are built into Google’s ranking algorithms – just saying.

So just keep this in mind.

Forum discussion at X.