Is Ai poisoning quietly become the new black hat seo?

[Dr. SEO]

Optimizing content and entities for better AI visibility is legitimate GEO, but creating artificial citation networks or manipulating entities influence AI answers starts looking like black hat AI SEO.

 

[TrackBid]

I think real mentions are fine, but making fake ones only to influence AI feels different.

 

[Jake Bohel Iom]

I think it becomes AI optimization when you're creating genuinely useful, relevant mentions that help AI systems understand an entity.

 

[Steptoe]

Is Ai poisoning quietly become the new black hat seo?

It's not poisoning, it's generously giving LLMs loads of free data for training purposes

 

[Anos_King]

BH means to manuputate the singals. AI can also be manipulated. AI citation from reputed sites works. specially Reddit and Quora.

Ai signals definitely influenced which are similar to traditional search signals. Reddit and quora carries weight but source quality, context are still matters here.

I think it depends on the mentions. Real and relevant ones are fine, but fake mentions just to influence AI answers are different.

I'd draw the line at intent. Relevant mentions that add real context are ai optimized ,fabricated mentions create only to manipulate ai responses which are closer to black hat.

 

[rogueperry]

Lately, I have noticing discussion about GEO, Ai Citation, entity seo and optimized content for ai search.

It got me thinking....

If there was someone building large scale of citations network and entity mentioning just for influence ai responses.... where do we draw? Is this simply ai optimization?

I am curious about this ?

imo the line is quite clear optimizing the actual citations for greater exposure is SEO or AEO but making up fictitious citations to trick the ai into giving you an answer is just the plain black hat.

 

[Anos_King]

Even though AI is becoming increasingly intelligent, I don't think any system will ever be able to replace human intelligence and real-life interactions within the community.

Imo, ai can process a lot of information but the real query is how much of the information are actually trusted. That where I think human signals and reputation still matter.

Optimizing content and entities for better AI visibility is legitimate GEO, but creating artificial citation networks or manipulating entities influence AI answers starts looking like black hat AI SEO.

Yeah, that pretty much where I see the line too.optimizing for visibility is one thing but deliberately creating signals just to push ai answe feels more like manipulations than optimization.

It's not poisoning, it's generously giving LLMs loads of free data for training purposes

Fair point, but if everyone starts generously feeding the same signals to influence what LLMs learn or cite, i think I gets interesting pretty quickly. That's where the line between optimization and manipulation gets blurry

 

[doodlepilot]

Lately, I have noticing discussion about GEO, Ai Citation, entity seo and optimized content for ai search.

It got me thinking....

If there was someone building large scale of citations network and entity mentioning just for influence ai responses.... where do we draw? Is this simply ai optimization?

I am curious about this ?

There is an vry odd statement imo. getting your brand mentioned on things that AI systems can find is actually marketing but forcing mentions simply to skew results is link spamming with the brand new target.

 

[morgans33]

its 100%the new bh seo bro building massive fake networks to trick llms is exactly like building spammy pbns back in the day google will definitly nuke them soon..

 

[rickportal]

Lately, I have noticing discussion about GEO, Ai Citation, entity seo and optimized content for ai search.

It got me thinking....

If there was someone building large scale of citations network and entity mentioning just for influence ai responses.... where do we draw? Is this simply ai optimization?

I am curious about this ?

in my opinion the lines is blurred where citations are made up with an intention to manipulate AI response rather than mentions any actual citation. SEO has been doing this with links all the tym , so ai citations might be the next one on the lists .

 

[Anos_King]

its 100%the new bh seo bro building massive fake networks to trick llms is exactly like building spammy pbns back in the day google will definitly nuke them soon..

Pbn comparison makes sense, the real question is how quickly LLMs can detect artificial citation pattern before this becomes next spam game

 

[Anos_King]

There is an vry odd statement imo. getting your brand mentioned on things that AI systems can find is actually marketing but forcing mentions simply to skew results is link spamming with the brand new target.

That's where I think links gets blurry when the goal shifts from building visibility to deliberately manipulating what ai system associate with brand. Tactics may look similar on surface but intent and scale make big difference

 

[Andrew_w]

Where do you personally draw the line between being visible and being manipulative? And do you think platforms like Google or OpenAI will eventually crack down on this kind of activity?

 

[lazykoala]

Lately, I have noticing discussion about GEO, Ai Citation, entity seo and optimized content for ai search.

It got me thinking....

If there was someone building large scale of citations network and entity mentioning just for influence ai responses.... where do we draw? Is this simply ai optimization?

I am curious about this ?

To me poisoning seems to be a newer surface for an attacks where as traditional black hat seo have some other characteristics. However in the case when someone tries to fills a model with false entities or citations in order to influence the answer the goal is manipulation over anyway.

 

[elysiariddle]

Yeah, pretty much. AI poisoning feels like the newer version of negative SEO, except you’re trying to manipulate what AI systems learn or surface about a site instead of just its Google rankings.

 

[HanTi5]

Imo, ai can process a lot of information but the real query is how much of the information are actually trusted. That where I think human signals and reputation still matter.

I agree with you that humans are still the foundation of intelligence, but we must also acknowledge that since the development of AI, humans have been greatly helped, saving time spent searching for information compared to the past. However, we shouldn't rely too heavily on AI.

 

[Anos_King]

Not at all. Depend the quality of content and relevancy but while doing black hat its always risky because of foot prints.

Exactly, relevance and content quality make it useful for ai visibility but scaling it for manipulation creates here footprint and this tactics turn to liability also.