SEO
Google Ads To Phase Out Enhanced CPC Bidding Strategy
![Google Ads To Phase Out Enhanced CPC Bidding Strategy Google Ads To Phase Out Enhanced CPC Bidding Strategy](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Google-Ads-To-Phase-Out-Enhanced-CPC-Bidding-Strategy.jpeg)
Google has announced plans to discontinue its Enhanced Cost-Per-Click (eCPC) bidding strategy for search and display ad campaigns.
This change, set to roll out in stages over the coming months, marks the end of an era for one of Google’s earliest smart bidding options.
Dates & Changes
Starting October 2024, new search and display ad campaigns will no longer be able to select Enhanced CPC as a bidding strategy.
However, existing eCPC campaigns will continue to function normally until March 2025.
From March 2025, all remaining search and display ad campaigns using Enhanced CPC will be automatically migrated to manual CPC bidding.
Advertisers who prefer not to change their campaigns before this date will see their bidding strategy default to manual CPC.
Impact On Display Campaigns
No immediate action is required for advertisers running display campaigns with the Maximize Clicks strategy and Enhanced CPC enabled.
These campaigns will automatically transition to the Maximize Clicks bidding strategy in March 2025.
Rationale Behind The Change
Google introduced Enhanced CPC over a decade ago as its first Smart Bidding strategy. The company has since developed more advanced machine learning-driven bidding options, such as Maximize Conversions with an optional target CPA and Maximize Conversion Value with an optional target ROAS.
In an email to affected advertisers, Google stated:
“These strategies have the potential to deliver comparable or superior outcomes. As we transition to these improved strategies, search and display ads campaigns will phase out Enhanced CPC.”
What This Means for Advertisers
This update signals Google’s continued push towards more sophisticated, AI-driven bidding strategies.
In the coming months, advertisers currently relying on Enhanced CPC will need to evaluate their options and potentially adapt their campaign management approaches.
While the change may require some initial adjustments, it also allows advertisers to explore and leverage Google’s more advanced bidding strategies, potentially improving campaign performance and efficiency.
FAQ
What change is Google implementing for Enhanced CPC bidding?
Google will discontinue the Enhanced Cost-Per-Click (eCPC) bidding strategy for search and display ad campaigns.
- New search and display ad campaigns can’t select eCPC starting October 2024.
- Existing campaigns will function with eCPC until March 2025.
- From March 2025, remaining eCPC campaigns will switch to manual CPC bidding.
How will this update impact existing campaigns using Enhanced CPC?
Campaigns using Enhanced CPC will continue as usual until March 2025. After that:
- Search and display ad campaigns employing eCPC will automatically migrate to manual CPC bidding.
- Display campaigns with Maximize Clicks and eCPC enabled will transition to the Maximize Clicks strategy in March 2025.
What are the recommended alternatives to Enhanced CPC?
Google suggests using its more advanced, AI-driven bidding strategies:
- Maximize Conversions – Can include an optional target CPA (Cost Per Acquisition).
- Maximize Conversion Value – Can include an optional target ROAS (Return on Ad Spend).
These strategies are expected to deliver comparable or superior outcomes compared to Enhanced CPC.
What should advertisers do in preparation for this change?
Advertisers need to evaluate their current reliance on Enhanced CPC and explore alternatives:
- Assess how newer AI-driven bidding strategies can be integrated into their campaigns.
- Consider transitioning some campaigns earlier to adapt to the new strategies gradually.
- Leverage tools and resources provided by Google to maximize performance and efficiency.
This proactive approach will help manage changes smoothly and explore potential performance improvements.
Featured Image: Vladimka production/Shutterstock
SEO
The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893769_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
We analyzed the organic traffic growth of 1,600 SaaS companies to discover the SEO strategies that work best in 2024…
…and those that work the worst.
In this article, we’re looking at the companies that lost the greatest amount of estimated organic traffic, year over year.
- We analyzed 1,600 SaaS companies and used the Ahrefs API to pull estimated monthly organic traffic data for August 2023 and August 2024.
- Companies were ranked by estimated monthly organic traffic loss as a percentage of their starting traffic.
- We’ve filtered out traffic loss caused by website migrations and URL redirects and set a minimum starting traffic threshold of 10,000 monthly organic pageviews.
This is a list of the SaaS companies that had the greatest estimated monthly organic traffic loss from August 2023 to August 2024.
Sidenote.
Our organic traffic metrics are estimates, and not necessarily reflective of the company’s actual traffic (only they know that). Traffic loss is not always bad, and there are plenty of reasons why companies may choose to delete pages and sacrifice keyword rankings.
Rank | Company | Change | Monthly Organic Traffic 2023 | Monthly Organic Traffic 2024 | Traffic Loss |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Causal | -99.52% | 307,158 | 1,485 | -305,673 |
2 | Contently | -97.16% | 276,885 | 7,866 | -269,019 |
3 | Datanyze | -95.46% | 486,626 | 22,077 | -464,549 |
4 | BetterCloud | -94.14% | 42,468 | 2,489 | -39,979 |
5 | Ricotta Trivia | -91.46% | 193,713 | 16,551 | -177,162 |
6 | Colourbox | -85.43% | 67,883 | 9,888 | -57,995 |
7 | Tabnine | -84.32% | 160,328 | 25,142 | -135,186 |
8 | AppFollow | -83.72% | 35,329 | 5,753 | -29,576 |
9 | Serverless | -80.61% | 37,896 | 7,348 | -30,548 |
10 | UserGuiding | -80.50% | 115,067 | 22,435 | -92,632 |
11 | Hopin | -79.25% | 19,581 | 4,064 | -15,517 |
12 | Writer | -78.32% | 2,460,359 | 533,288 | -1,927,071 |
13 | NeverBounce by ZoomInfo | -77.91% | 552,780 | 122,082 | -430,698 |
14 | ZoomInfo | -76.11% | 5,192,624 | 1,240,481 | -3,952,143 |
15 | Sakari | -73.76% | 27,084 | 7,106 | -19,978 |
16 | Frase | -71.39% | 83,569 | 23,907 | -59,662 |
17 | LiveAgent | -70.03% | 322,613 | 96,700 | -225,913 |
18 | Scoro | -70.01% | 51,701 | 15,505 | -36,196 |
19 | accessiBe | -69.45% | 111,877 | 34,177 | -77,700 |
20 | Olist | -67.51% | 204,298 | 66,386 | -137,912 |
21 | Hevo Data | -66.96% | 235,427 | 77,781 | -157,646 |
22 | TextGears | -66.68% | 19,679 | 6,558 | -13,121 |
23 | Unbabel | -66.40% | 45,987 | 15,450 | -30,537 |
24 | Courier | -66.03% | 35,300 | 11,992 | -23,308 |
25 | G2 | -65.74% | 4,397,226 | 1,506,545 | -2,890,681 |
For each of the top five companies, I ran a five-minute analysis using Ahrefs Site Explorer to understand what may have caused their traffic decline.
Possible explanations include Google penalties, programmatic SEO, and AI content.
Causal | 2023 | 2024 | Absolute change | Percent change |
---|---|---|---|---|
Organic traffic | 307,158 | 1,485 | -305,673 | -99.52% |
Organic pages | 5,868 | 547 | -5,321 | -90.68% |
Organic keywords | 222,777 | 4,023 | -218,754 | -98.19% |
Keywords in top 3 | 8,969 | 26 | -8943 | -99.71% |
Causal is a finance platform for startups. They lost an estimated 99.52% of their organic traffic as a result of a Google manual penalty:
This story might sound familiar. Causal became internet-famous for an “SEO heist” that saw them clone a competitor’s sitemap and use generative AI to publish 1,800 low-quality articles like this:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893766 634 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893766_634_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893766 634 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893766_634_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
Google caught wind and promptly issued a manual penalty. Causal lost hundreds of rankings and hundreds of thousands of pageviews, virtually overnight:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
As the Ahrefs SEO Toolbar shows, the offending blog posts are now 301 redirected to the company’s (now much better, much more human-looking) blog homepage:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893766 532 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893766_532_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893766 532 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893766_532_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
Contently | 2023 | 2024 | Absolute change | Percent change |
---|---|---|---|---|
Organic traffic | 276,885 | 7,866 | -269,019 | -97.16% |
Organic pages | 32,752 | 1,121 | -31,631 | -96.58% |
Organic keywords | 94,706 | 12,000 | -82,706 | -87.33% |
Keywords in top 3 | 1,874 | 68 | -1,806 | -96.37% |
Contently is a content marketing platform. They lost 97% of their estimated organic traffic by removing thousands of user-generated pages.
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893766 662 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893766_662_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893766 662 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893766_662_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
Almost all of the website’s traffic loss seems to stem from deindexing the subdomains used to host their members’ writing portfolios:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 584 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_584_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 584 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_584_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
A quick Google search for “contently writer portfolios” suggests that the company made the deliberate decision to deindex all writer portfolios by default, and only relist them once they’ve been manually vetted and approved:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 266 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_266_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 266 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_266_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
We can see that these portfolio subdomains are now 302 redirected back to Contently’s homepage:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 27 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_27_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 27 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_27_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
And looking at the keyword rankings Contently lost in the process, it’s easy to guess why this change was necessary. It looks like the free portfolio subdomains were being abused to promote CBD gummies and pirated movies:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 370 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_370_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 370 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_370_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
Datanyze | 2023 | 2024 | Absolute change | Percent change |
---|---|---|---|---|
Organic traffic | 486,626 | 22,077 | -464,549 | -95.46% |
Organic pages | 1,168,889 | 377,142 | -791,747 | -67.74% |
Organic keywords | 2,565,527 | 712,270 | -1,853,257 | -72.24% |
Keywords in top 3 | 7,475 | 177 | -7,298 | -97.63% |
Datanyze provides contact data for sales prospecting. They lost 96% of their estimated organic traffic, possibly as a result of programmatic content that Google has since deemed too low quality to rank.
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 1 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_1_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 1 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_1_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
Looking at the Site Structure report in Ahrefs, we can see over 80% of the website’s organic traffic loss is isolated to the /companies and /people subfolders:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 855 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_855_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 855 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_855_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
Looking at some of the pages in these subfolders, it looks like Datanyze built thousands of programmatic landing pages to help promote the people and companies the company offers data for:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 323 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_323_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 323 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_323_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
As a result, the majority of Datanyze’s dropped keyword rankings are names of people and companies:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 895 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_895_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 895 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_895_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
Many of these pages still return 200 HTTP status codes, and a Google site search still shows hundreds of indexed pages:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 251 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_251_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 251 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_251_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
In this case, not all of the programmatic pages have been deleted—instead, it’s possible that Google has decided to rerank these pages into much lower positions and drop them from most SERPs.
BetterCloud | 2023 | 2024 | Absolute change | Percent change |
---|---|---|---|---|
Organic traffic | 42,468 | 2,489 | -39,979 | -94.14% |
Organic pages | 1,643 | 504 | -1,139 | -69.32% |
Organic keywords | 107,817 | 5,806 | -102,011 | -94.61% |
Keywords in top 3 | 1,550 | 32 | -1,518 | -97.94% |
Bettercloud is a SaaS spend management platform. They lost 94% of their estimated organic traffic around the time of Google’s November Core Update:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 743 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_743_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 743 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_743_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
Looking at the Top Pages report for BetterCloud, most of the traffic loss can be traced back to a now-deleted /academy subfolder:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 488 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_488_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 488 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_488_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
The pages in the subfolder are now deleted, but by using Ahrefs’ Page Inspect feature, it’s possible to look at a snapshot of some of the pages’ HTML content.
This short, extremely generic article on “How to Delete an Unwanted Page in Google Docs” looks a lot like basic AI-generated content:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 574 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_574_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 574 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_574_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
This is the type of content that Google has been keen to demote from the SERPs.
Given the timing of the website’s traffic drop (a small decline after the October core update, and a precipitous decline after the November core update), it’s possible that Google demoted the site after an AI content generation experiment.
Ricotta Trivia | 2023 | 2024 | Absolute change | Percent change |
---|---|---|---|---|
Organic traffic | 193,713 | 16,551 | -177,162 | -91.46% |
Organic pages | 218 | 231 | 13 | 5.96% |
Organic keywords | 83,988 | 37,640 | -46,348 | -55.18% |
Keywords in top 3 | 3,124 | 275 | -2,849 | -91.20% |
Ricotta Trivia is a Slack add-on that offers icebreakers and team-building games. They lost an estimated 91% of their monthly organic traffic, possibly because of thin content and poor on-page experience on their blog.
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 457 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_457_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 457 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_457_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
Looking at the Site Structure report, 99.7% of the company’s traffic loss is isolated to the /blog subfolder:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 252 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_252_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 252 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_252_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
Digging into the Organic keywords report, we can see that the website has lost hundreds of first-page rankings for high-volume keywords like get to know you questions, funny team names, and question of the day:
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 323 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_323_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893767 323 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893767_323_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.png)
While these keywords seem strongly related to the company’s core business, the article content itself seems very thin—and the page is covered with intrusive advertising banners and pop-ups (a common hypothesis for why some sites were negatively impacted by recent Google updates):
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893768 58 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893768_58_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
![The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS 1725893768 58 The 25 Biggest Traffic Losers in SaaS](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/1725893768_58_The-25-Biggest-Traffic-Losers-in-SaaS.jpg)
The site seems to show a small recovery on the back of the August 2024 core update—so there may be hope yet.
Final thoughts
All of the data for this article comes from Ahrefs. Want to research your competitors in the same way? Check out Site Explorer.
SEO
Mediavine Bans Publisher For Overuse Of AI-Generated Content
![Mediavine Bans Publisher For Overuse Of AI-Generated Content Single continuous line drawing robot sitting near piles of work files.](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Mediavine-Bans-Publisher-For-Overuse-Of-AI-Generated-Content.jpeg)
According to details surfacing online, ad management firm Mediavine is terminating publishers’ accounts for overusing AI.
Mediavine is a leading ad management company providing products and services to help website publishers monetize their content.
The company holds elite status as a Google Certified Publishing Partner, which indicates that it meets Google’s highest standards and requirements for ad networks and exchanges.
AI Content Triggers Account Terminations
The terminations came to light in a post on the Reddit forum r/Blogging, where a user shared an email they received from Mediavine citing “overuse of artificially created content.”
Trista Jensen, Mediavine’s Director of Ad Operations & Market Quality, states in the email:
“Our third party content quality tools have flagged your sites for overuse of artificially created content. Further internal investigation has confirmed those findings.”
Jensen stated that due to the overuse of AI content, “our top partners will stop spending on your sites, which will negatively affect future monetization efforts.”
Consequently, Mediavine terminated the publisher’s account “effective immediately.”
The Risks Of Low-Quality AI Content
This strict enforcement aligns with Mediavine’s publicly stated policy prohibiting websites from using “low-quality, mass-produced, unedited or undisclosed AI content that is scraped from other websites.”
In a March 7 blog post titled “AI and Our Commitment to a Creator-First Future,” the company declared opposition to low-value AI content that could “devalue the contributions of legitimate content creators.”
Mediavine warned in the post:
“Without publishers, there is no open web. There is no content to train the models that power AI. There is no internet.”
The company says it’s using its platform to “advocate for publishers” and uphold quality standards in the face of AI’s disruptive potential.
Mediavine states:
“We’re also developing faster, automated tools to help us identify low-quality, mass-produced AI content across the web.”
Targeting ‘AI Clickbait Kingpin’ Tactics
While the Reddit user’s identity wasn’t disclosed, the incident has drawn connections to the tactics of Nebojša Vujinović Vujo, who was dubbed an “AI Clickbait Kingpin” in a recent Wired exposé.
According to Wired, Vujo acquired over 2,000 dormant domains and populated them with AI-generated, search-optimized content designed purely to capture ad revenue.
His strategies represent the low-quality, artificial content Mediavine has vowed to prohibit.
Potential Implications
Lost Revenue
Mediavine’s terminations highlight potential implications for publishers that rely on artificial intelligence to generate website content at scale.
Perhaps the most immediate and tangible implication is the risk of losing ad revenue.
For publishers that depend heavily on programmatic advertising or sponsored content deals as key revenue drivers, being blocked from major ad networks could devastate their business models.
Devalued Domains
Another potential impact is the devaluation of domains and websites built primarily on AI-generated content.
If this pattern of AI content overuse triggers account terminations from companies like Mediavine, it could drastically diminish the value proposition of scooping up these domains.
Damaged Reputations & Brands
Beyond the lost monetization opportunities, publishers leaning too heavily into automated AI content also risk permanent reputational damage to their brands.
Once a determining authority flags a website for AI overuse, it could impact how that site is perceived by readers, other industry partners, and search engines.
In Summary
AI has value as an assistive tool for publishers, but relying heavily on automated content creation poses significant risks.
These include monetization challenges, potential reputation damage, and increasing regulatory scrutiny. Mediavine’s strict policy illustrates the possible consequences for publishers.
It’s important to note that Mediavine’s move to terminate publisher accounts over AI content overuse represents an independent policy stance taken by the ad management firm itself.
The action doesn’t directly reflect the content policies or enforcement positions of Google, whose publishing partner program Mediavine is certified under.
We have reached out to Mediavine requesting a comment on this story. We’ll update this article with more information when it’s provided.
Featured Image: Simple Line/Shutterstock
SEO
Google’s Guidance About The Recent Ranking Update
![Google's Guidance About The Recent Ranking Update Google issues a statement about their recent algorithm update](https://articles.entireweb.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Googles-Guidance-About-The-Recent-Ranking-Update.jpg)
Google’s Danny Sullivan explained the recent update, addressing site recoveries and cautioning against making radical changes to improve rankings. He also offered advice for publishes whose rankings didn’t improve after the last update.
Google’s Still Improving The Algorithm
Danny said that Google is still working on their ranking algorithm, indicating that more changes (for the positive) are likely on the way. The main idea he was getting across is that they’re still trying to fill the gaps in surfacing high quality content from independent sites. Which is good because big brand sites don’t necessarily have the best answers.
He wrote:
“…the work to connect people with “a range of high quality sites, including small or independent sites that are creating useful, original content” is not done with this latest update. We’re continuing to look at this area and how to improve further with future updates.”
A Message To Those Who Were Left Behind
There was a message to those publishers whose work failed to recover with the latest update, to let them know that Google is still working to surface more of the independent content and that there may be relief on the next go.
Danny advised:
“…if you’re feeling confused about what to do in terms of rankings…if you know you’re producing great content for your readers…If you know you’re producing it, keep doing that…it’s to us to keep working on our systems to better reward it.”
Google Cautions Against “Improving” Sites
Something really interesting that he mentioned was a caution against trying to improve rankings of something that’s already on page one in order to rank even higher. Tweaking a site to get from position six or whatever to something higher has always been a risky thing to do for many reasons I won’t elaborate on here. But Danny’s warning increases the pressure to not just think twice before trying to optimize a page for search engines but to think three times and then some more.
Danny cautioned that sites that make it to the top of the SERPs should consider that a win and to let it ride instead of making changes right now in order to improve their rankings. The reason for that caution is that the search results continue to change and the implication is that changing a site now may negatively impact the rankings in a newly updated search index.
He wrote:
“If you’re showing in the top results for queries, that’s generally a sign that we really view your content well. Sometimes people then wonder how to move up a place or two. Rankings can and do change naturally over time. We recommend against making radical changes to try and move up a spot or two”
How Google Handled Feedback
There was also some light shed on what Google did with all the feedback they received from publishers who lost rankings. Danny wrote that the feedback and site examples he received was summarized, with examples, and sent to the search engineers for review. They continue to use that feedback for the next round of improvements.
He explained:
“I went through it all, by hand, to ensure all the sites who submitted were indeed heard. You were, and you continue to be. …I summarized all that feedback, pulling out some of the compelling examples of where our systems could do a better job, especially in terms of rewarding open web creators. Our search engineers have reviewed it and continue to review it, along with other feedback we receive, to see how we can make search better for everyone, including creators.”
Feedback Itself Didn’t Lead To Recovery
Danny also pointed out that sites that recovered their rankings did not do so because of they submitted feedback to Google. Danny wasn’t specific about this point but it conforms with previous statements about Google’s algorithms that they implement fixes at scale. So instead of saying, “Hey let’s fix the rankings of this one site” it’s more about figuring out if the problem is symptomatic of something widescale and how to change things for everybody with the same problem.
Danny wrote:
“No one who submitted, by the way, got some type of recovery in Search because they submitted. Our systems don’t work that way.”
That feedback didn’t lead to recovery but was used as data shouldn’t be surprising. Even as far back as the 2004 Florida Update Matt Cutts collected feedback from people, including myself, and I didn’t see a recovery for a false positive until everyone else also got back their rankings.
Takeaways
Google’s work on their algorithm is ongoing:
Google is continuing to tune its algorithms to improve its ability to rank high quality content, especially from smaller publishers. Danny Sullivan emphasized that this is an ongoing process.
What content creators should focus on:
Danny’s statement encouraged publishers to focus on consistently creating high quality content and not to focus on optimizing for algorithms. Focusing on quality should be the priority.
What should publishers do if their high-quality content isn’t yet rewarded with better rankings?
Publishers who are certain of the quality of their content are encouraged to hold steady and keep it coming because Google’s algorithms are still being refined.
Featured Image by Shutterstock/Cast Of Thousands
-
SEO6 days ago
How to Market When Information is Dirt Cheap
-
SEARCHENGINES7 days ago
Daily Search Forum Recap: September 2, 2024
-
SEO4 days ago
Early Analysis & User Feedback
-
SEARCHENGINES6 days ago
Daily Search Forum Recap: September 3, 2024
-
SEO7 days ago
What Is Largest Contentful Paint: An Easy Explanation
-
SEO6 days ago
Google Trends Subscriptions Quietly Canceled
-
WORDPRESS6 days ago
MyDataNinja
-
AFFILIATE MARKETING4 days ago
What Is Founder Mode and Why Is It Better Than Manager Mode?