Weekly SEO News, January 31 - 7 February
Google: Readers Can Tell When Author Bios Are Just for SEO
Google's John Mueller recently commented on Bluesky about using author bios for SEO, stating that people can easily recognize when they are solely used as a ranking tactic, which he finds awkward rather than reassuring. His response was prompted by Nikki Pilkington, who urged content creators to view author bios as a means to build trust with readers rather than as an SEO strategy. Mueller amplified her message by resharing her post and reinforcing the idea that authenticity matters more than optimization in author bios.
Google Releases Guide on Using Google Analytics & Search Console Together
Google has introduced a new developer document and video explaining how to integrate Google Analytics and Google Search Console data effectively. A common challenge for users is comparing data from these two tools, as they measure different metrics in distinct ways.
Google emphasizes that combining these platforms provides a more complete understanding of how users discover and interact with a website, enabling better SEO decision-making. The guide walks users through using Looker Studio to analyze data, visualize trends, and resolve discrepancies between the tools.
Key differences outlined in the document:
The guide includes sections on comparing data, monitoring search traffic in Looker Studio, investigating deeper insights, and understanding data discrepancies.
Google’s Daniel Waisberg and Cherry Prommawin also released a video discussing the integration, with Waisberg sharing on X that this resource provides valuable insights into making GA and GSC work together effectively.
Google: Don't Update Lastmod Date for Copyright Year Changes
领英推荐
Google’s Gary Illyes strongly advised against updating the lastmod date in sitemaps when the only change on a page is updating the copyright year in the footer. Posting on Bluesky in all caps, he emphasized that such minor updates do not warrant modifying the lastmod date.
Illyes acknowledged that SEOs often update lastmod dates too frequently, sometimes due to their CMS settings. However, he clarified that Google only considers substantial content changes as significant enough for an update.
When asked what qualifies as a “significant” change, Illyes noted that while Google doesn’t provide a strict definition, meaningful content updates, schema modifications, and internal linking changes are generally considered valid—whereas copyright year updates are not.
Google Adds Generative AI Mentions to Search Quality Rater Guidelines
Google recently updated its Search Quality Rater Guidelines, adding 11 new pages and, for the first time, explicitly mentioning "generative AI"—which now appears 14 times throughout the document.
While previous versions referenced AI, this update signals a more defined stance on how AI-generated content is assessed. According to findings shared by Adomas ?ulcas on LinkedIn, most mentions of generative AI are in a negative context, primarily as a warning against scaled content abuse and excessive paraphrasing.
Key Takeaways from Google's Guidelines:
Generative AI is defined as a machine learning model that can create text, images, music, and code. While it can be a valuable tool, misuse can lead to quality penalties.
Scaled content abuse (producing mass AI-generated pages with little value) is flagged as a serious issue, leading to a lowest quality rating.
Paraphrased content—whether by AI or humans—is scrutinized, especially if it lacks originality or effort. However, AI-assisted content isn’t inherently low-quality if used with high effort and added value.
Google's evolving stance suggests that AI-generated content, when used responsibly, can be acceptable, but sites relying on low-effort, mass-produced AI content risk being rated as low quality.