Is Google actually penalizing AI content?

R

restlex

Newbie
Joined
Jun 23, 2026
Messages
10
Reaction score
4
Been scaling up content production with AI on a few sites and getting paranoid after seeing "ranking tanked, pretty sure it's the AI content" threads pop up, but plenty of other people saying their AI-heavy sites are still ranking fine months later with zero issues. Feels like everyone's had a completely different experience and nobody actually knows which sites got hit for AI content specifically or what..
Is anyone actually seeing a real isolated ranking impact from this? Does running stuff through Originality.ai/Copyleaks/whatever actually correlate with what Google itself flags? Curious what people are doing differently on the sites that held up heavier humanizing/rewriting passes, mixing in more manually written sections or it is mostly random as anyone knows those tools doens't really work...
 
Advertise on BHW
People who rank AI content have good prompts. If you use bad prompts, and they are easy to detect as AI is bad. I'm sure you will have issues ... I know websites that use AI humanizers are hard to detect as AI, and they rank good, this days; even BHW has an AI detector for comments ...
 
Not really, I see more and more AI content all the time... People talk about "AI CONTENT IS BAD, DONT DO IT" bla bla bla... Just to scare you so THEY can do it.

Look at this, talking shit but they use AI and they are on first page, also not just them, others too...
 

Attachments

  • 2.png
    2.png
    148 KB · Views: 40
  • 1.png
    1.png
    56.8 KB · Views: 40
If the content is valuable and not meaningless junk, Google and any other platform doesn't care, even if AI scanners flag it as 100% AI-generated.
 
Google does not penalize AI-generated content simply because it's created with AI. It only penalizes low-quality, spammy, or unhelpful content, whether written by humans or AI.
 
restlex said:
actually correlate with what Google itself flags
Click to expand...
You are the only one in here who asked the actual question, so: no, they do not correlate, and you can probably stop paying for the humanizing passes.

Originality and Copyleaks measure one thing, how statistically typical your text is of an LLM. Google's spam side measures something else entirely, whether a batch of pages adds anything. Their policy is literally named scaled content abuse and the wording is deliberate: unoriginal content at scale, "no matter how it's created". Same docs say they reward quality "however it is produced". They are not running a detector on your prose. They are looking at the footprint: hundreds of pages a month, same template, answering queries that already have answers, no authorship depth anywhere. A human content farm trips it exactly as hard as a GPT one.

Which is why the threads you read seem to contradict each other. The AI-heavy sites that got hit in the June spam update (ran June 24 to 26, second one this year) were mass-producing. The AI-heavy sites still ranking are publishing at a rate a human editor could plausibly have reviewed. The detector score was never the variable.

If you want a real canary, watch publish velocity against indexed rate per site section, not an Originality percentage.
 
not just AI they are actively destroying android market too.. they become so big and now they think they will do whatever they can.
 
restlex said:
Been scaling up content production with AI on a few sites and getting paranoid after seeing "ranking tanked, pretty sure it's the AI content" threads pop up, but plenty of other people saying their AI-heavy sites are still ranking fine months later with zero issues. Feels like everyone's had a completely different experience and nobody actually knows which sites got hit for AI content specifically or what..
Is anyone actually seeing a real isolated ranking impact from this? Does running stuff through Originality.ai/Copyleaks/whatever actually correlate with what Google itself flags? Curious what people are doing differently on the sites that held up heavier humanizing/rewriting passes, mixing in more manually written sections or it is mostly random as anyone knows those tools doens't really work...
Click to expand...
From what I've seen, AI itself isn't the issuelow-quality, unhelpful content is.
The sites holding up best usually edit, fact-check, and add original insights instead of publishing raw AI output. AI detection scores don't seem to correlate well with Google rankings; user value and search intent matter much more.
 
That's bullshit to scare other people off, high quality AI content is completely undetectable if you do it right. What is probably deranked is bullshit low quality mass produced AI content
 
restlex said:
Been scaling up content production with AI on a few sites and getting paranoid after seeing "ranking tanked, pretty sure it's the AI content" threads pop up, but plenty of other people saying their AI-heavy sites are still ranking fine months later with zero issues. Feels like everyone's had a completely different experience and nobody actually knows which sites got hit for AI content specifically or what..
Is anyone actually seeing a real isolated ranking impact from this? Does running stuff through Originality.ai/Copyleaks/whatever actually correlate with what Google itself flags? Curious what people are doing differently on the sites that held up heavier humanizing/rewriting passes, mixing in more manually written sections or it is mostly random as anyone knows those tools doens't really work...
Click to expand...
AI content alone is usually not the reason rankings drop low quality or u can say unhelpful content is a much bigger problem.
mostly AI detection tools don't match how google evaluates content, so don't rely on their scores. these are two different things I think. The sites that keep ranking well usually focus on useful original well edited content with real value instead of just AI generated text.
 
From what I have seen, the bigger issue is consistency and quality rather than whether AI was involved

I have seen AI assisted pages perform well when they were reviewed, expanded, and made genuinely useful The sites that struggled often seemed to have thin or repetitive content, but it is hard to say AI alone was the reason
 
Well, almost every day someone asks this here on bhw, and the truth is always the same: google penalizes bad and shallow content, not ai content. If you're creating interesting and relevant content, along with some link building you'll reach any result you want
 
Yes, low quality AI slop is definitely getting penalized and rightfully so, there’s just too much low quality content being pushed these days.
 
valac1993 said:
Not really, I see more and more AI content all the time... People talk about "AI CONTENT IS BAD, DONT DO IT" bla bla bla... Just to scare you so THEY can do it.

Look at this, talking shit but they use AI and they are on first page, also not just them, others too...
Click to expand...

If your domain has authority, you can use any content and it will rank.
 
I would recommend that you listen to the suggestions in this thread and go ahead with your site. Check the content for value before publishing it on your site, and don't mass-produce content. Slow and steady wins the race every time. Good luck!
 
Advertise on BHW
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sign up now!

Main Menu

Home Main Forum List Black Hat SEO White Hat SEO BHW Newbie Guide Blogging Black Hat Tools Social Media Downloads

Marketplace

Account Selling Content / Copywriting EBooks / Methods Hosting Misc Proxies For Sale SEO - Link building SEO - Packages Social Media Social Media - Panels Web Design More

Making Money

Affiliate Programs Hire a Freelancer IM Journeys Making Money Pay Per Click Site Flipping Want to Buy

BlackHat World

Dispute Resolution Forum Suggestions & Feedback Introductions Lounge
Back
Top