Published by NewsPR Today | January 2026
In recent months, the world of search optimisation has been flooded with new terms. AI SEO, AEO, GEO, LLM optimisation, and many other labels are being promoted as the next essential step for online success. For many website owners, marketers, and businesses, this constant flow of new language has created confusion and anxiety. There is a growing fear that traditional SEO is no longer enough and that without adopting new AI-focused tools or strategies, visibility in search results will disappear.
To address this uncertainty, Google recently shared a clear and measured message through its own podcast, delivered by two senior members of the Google Search team, Danny Sullivan and John Mueller. Their discussion did not introduce new technical requirements or secret ranking methods. Instead, it reinforced a principle that has guided search optimisation for many years.
The message was simple. The fundamentals of SEO have not changed.
The rise of AI-related optimisation terms
As AI-driven tools and large language models have become more visible in search experiences, the marketing industry has responded by creating new terminology. These terms suggest that search optimisation has entered an entirely new phase, one that requires specialised expertise, advanced automation, or proprietary systems.
However, Google made it clear that these labels do not represent a new category of optimisation that replaces SEO. Instead, they are better understood as subsets of existing search practices. People are still searching for information. They are simply using different interfaces or formats. Whether a query is typed into a search bar or spoken to an AI-powered assistant, the underlying goal remains the same. Users want accurate, useful, and trustworthy information.
From Google’s perspective, optimising for AI-powered search experiences does not require abandoning established best practices. It requires continuing to apply them correctly.
No special advantage in using AI SEO tools
One of the most important points raised by Google is that hiring an “AI SEO expert” or purchasing an “AI optimisation tool” does not automatically provide an advantage in search rankings. These services are often presented as necessary upgrades, implying that traditional SEO knowledge is outdated.
Google strongly pushed back against this idea. There is no separate ranking system that rewards websites simply for using AI tools. There is no shortcut created by automation alone. The systems that evaluate content still focus on usefulness, relevance, and quality from a human perspective.
AI tools can help with efficiency. They can assist with research, drafting, or technical analysis. But they do not replace the responsibility of creating meaningful content. The quality of the output still depends on the intent, understanding, and judgment of the people behind it.
Content written for people remains the foundation
Throughout the discussion, Google repeatedly returned to one central idea. Content should be created for real people, not for machines. Many successful websites perform well in search without deliberately focusing on SEO techniques. They succeed because they understand their audience and address real needs clearly and honestly.
Google’s systems are designed to recognise this type of value over time. Attempts to impress algorithms directly, rather than serving users, often lead to short-term gains at best and long-term problems at worst.
This principle is especially relevant in the current environment, where some advice encourages creating separate versions of content for AI systems. Google explicitly discouraged this approach. Writing content specifically to satisfy a perceived preference of a language model introduces unnecessary complexity and risk. Search systems evolve continuously. Tactics designed to exploit temporary behaviours are unlikely to remain effective.
The problem with guarantees and fear-based marketing
Google also addressed the growing use of fear in SEO marketing. Many tools and agencies claim that websites are failing unless they adopt specific optimisation methods or subscribe to proprietary platforms. This fear is often reinforced through alarming messages, automated audits, or performance scores.
Google emphasised that no one can guarantee search rankings. Search results change constantly due to competition, user behaviour, and system improvements. Any promise of guaranteed results should be treated with extreme caution.
SEO is not a fixed formula. It never has been. Success depends on many factors, most of which cannot be controlled or predicted with certainty.
Misunderstanding third-party SEO scores
A significant source of confusion comes from metrics such as domain score, authority score, or spam score. Google made it very clear that these numbers are not part of its ranking systems. They are created by third-party tools based on their own data models and assumptions.
While these metrics may be useful for internal comparison or trend tracking within a specific tool, they do not represent Google’s evaluation of a website. A high score does not guarantee better rankings, and a low score does not indicate a penalty or lack of trust.
Focusing too heavily on improving these numbers can distract from meaningful improvements. Time spent chasing tool-generated scores is often better invested in improving clarity, accuracy, and relevance of content.
SEO tools and experts are optional support
Google did not dismiss the value of SEO professionals or tools. They acknowledged that these resources can be helpful, particularly for technical guidance, large-scale site changes, or efficiency. However, they are not required for success.
The key recommendation is understanding the basics first. Google encourages website owners to familiarise themselves with its own documentation and guidelines. This foundational knowledge allows people to evaluate external advice more effectively and avoid harmful recommendations.
Blind reliance on tools or agencies without understanding underlying principles increases risk. If a suggested tactic violates Google’s guidelines, the responsibility ultimately remains with the website owner.
Risks of advice that violates guidelines
Another critical warning from Google concerned practices that go against established policies. Some tools and agencies promote tactics that may deliver short-term visibility but expose websites to penalties or manual actions.
Google advised asking direct questions. If a recommendation seems aggressive or unusual, it is reasonable to ask whether it aligns with official guidelines. Legitimate SEO support should be transparent and grounded in documented best practices.
Understanding what is allowed and what is not is essential. No tool or expert can protect a site if its owner does not understand the basics.
Avoiding obsession with small technical details
Google also highlighted the danger of focusing too narrowly on minor ranking factors or isolated metrics. Many tools encourage constant optimisation of individual elements, which can lead to losing sight of the broader objective.
Search systems do not reduce websites to single numbers or checklists. They attempt to understand overall usefulness and relevance. Content that genuinely helps users will always have a stronger foundation than content engineered solely to meet perceived technical thresholds.
Long-term success comes from stability, not trends
One of the strongest themes in Google’s message is sustainability. SEO strategies built around temporary trends or emerging buzzwords often require constant adjustment. This approach may be feasible for experimental projects but is unrealistic for most businesses.
Long-term success comes from consistent effort, clear communication, and a genuine focus on user needs. These principles have remained stable through decades of changes in search technology.
xperts, is optional support, not a magic solution.
