The new helpful content update is anticipated to be a significant change. Google has provided a series of questions designed to help website owners assess whether their sites are created to genuinely assist users or simply to perform well in search engines. If your site falls into the latter category, you might face a sitewide signal that hampers your ability to rank.
Should this update prove as impactful as expected, it could lead to a major shift in the SEO landscape similar to what was seen with the launch of Penguin a decade ago. Sites that prioritize SEO tactics over creating valuable human-centric content could be adversely affected. The true potency of this ranking signal remains to be seen.
Does it affect all sites that use SEO?
Google clarified in their announcement that this update does not negate the importance of following SEO best practices. According to Google, “SEO is a helpful activity when it’s applied to people-first content.” This update targets sites that manipulate the system by producing content that may not be particularly helpful to users but still ranks well due to SEO rather than the quality of the content.
Is it a penalty?
Google carefully avoids labeling this as a penalty. It is not a manual action, nor will it appear in Google Search Console. It is not a spam action either. Instead, it’s described as a "signal," one of the many ranking signals outlined in Google’s documentation on how search works. If this signal affects your site, it might "feel" like a penalty. However, you can have this classification removed by improving your content. The algorithm classifying sites will run continuously, and if it assesses that your site’s content has become more searcher-friendly, the signal’s strength might be reduced or even lifted entirely.
Fresh Algorithm Impact
This classifier resembles the historical impact of early Penguin and Panda algorithms, which initially acted as filters. Websites with poor link profiles (Penguin) or low-quality content (Panda) faced ranking suppression until they made significant improvements. The helpful content classifier appears poised to have a similar sitewide suppressive impact, but there are notable differences. For instance:
- Real-time, continuous operation: New sites created solely for SEO will face the signal from the start, and existing sites may be impacted if too much SEO-driven content is detected.
- Gradual impact over a few months: Sites will be affected differently based on the amount of unhelpful content found. Sites can be reevaluated if the classifier deems their content useful to searchers for a prolonged period.
What constitutes people-first content?
Google emphasizes the importance of people-first content, though what this entails can be subjective. Here are some guiding questions from Google to help assess your content:
- Does your content appeal to an existing or intended audience, irrespective of search engines?
- Does it demonstrate first-hand expertise and depth of knowledge?
- Does your site have a clear primary purpose or focus?
Content’s purpose must be explicit, as Google aims to reward sites that genuinely fulfill user needs.
Determining SEO-focused content
Google suggests evaluating whether content is created primarily for attracting search engine hits rather than human readers. Sites with extensive unhelpful content might face stronger effects, and even well-crafted useful content might be impacted if the site is deemed primarily SEO-driven. Some red flags include:
- Producing lots of content on various topics hoping some will rank well.
- Using extensive automation for content creation.
- Aggregating and slightly re-wording others’ content without adding value.
- Writing on trending topics solely for search traffic rather than for an audience.
- Providing content that leaves readers seeking more information elsewhere.
- Writing to an arbitrary word count based on perceived SEO benefits.
To avoid these pitfalls, creators should focus on the actual users and their needs, producing content that is genuinely educational, informative, or entertaining.
Is recovery possible?
Recovery is feasible if the necessary steps are taken to identify and fix content that was primarily created for search engines. This involves:
- Assessing and improving or removing SEO-focused content.
- Enhancing content to be more useful, including incorporating user-generated content and first-hand evidence.
- Studying successful competitors for insight.
- Improving E-A-T (Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness) of the site.
- Clarifying the primary purpose of each page.
- Understanding when a site may need a complete overhaul or even abandonment if recovery seems unattainable.
Conclusions
Google’s latest update is not intended to attack SEO but rather to emphasize creating helpful, people-first content. Good SEO remains beneficial when aligned with content that prioritizes user needs. The update is expected to have a strong impact on many SEO-oriented sites, and it will be interesting to observe how the SEO community adapts.
