Google people-first content guidance
Google people-first content guidance,
as documented
The questions Google asks you to put to your own content, and the warning signs it lists, in Google's own words. Verified from Google's pages on 2026-10-07.
Google says its automated ranking systems are designed to prioritize helpful, reliable information that's created to benefit people, and not content that's created to manipulate search engine rankings. This page lists the questions and signals Google documents for self-assessing content, with the wording taken from its page.
What Google documents
| Topic | What Google says | Source |
|---|---|---|
| What the systems prioritize | “Google's automated ranking systems are designed to prioritize helpful, reliable information that's created to benefit people, and not content that's created to manipulate search engine rankings.” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Original information | “Does the content provide original information, reporting, research, or analysis?” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Beyond the obvious | “Does the content provide insightful analysis or interesting information that is beyond the obvious?” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Drawing on other sources | “If the content draws on other sources, does it avoid simply copying or rewriting those sources, and instead provide substantial additional value and originality?” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Titles | “Does the main heading or page title avoid exaggerating or being shocking in nature?” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Mass production | “Is the content mass-produced by or outsourced to a large number of creators, or spread across a large network of sites, so that individual pages or sites don't get as much attention or care?” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Trust signals | “Does the content present information in a way that makes you want to trust it, such as clear sourcing, evidence of the expertise involved, background about the author or the site that publishes it” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Factual errors | “Does the content have any easily-verified factual errors?” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Page experience | “Google's core ranking systems look to reward content that provides a good page experience.” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| People-first defined | “People-first content means content that's created primarily for people, and not to manipulate search engine rankings.” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| First-hand expertise | “Does your content clearly demonstrate first-hand expertise and a depth of knowledge” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Search engine-first content | “We recommend that you focus on creating people-first content to be successful with Google Search, rather than search engine-first content made primarily to gain search engine rankings.” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Warning sign: lots of topics | “Are you producing lots of content on many different topics in hopes that some of it might perform well in search results?” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Warning sign: extensive automation | “Are you using extensive automation to produce content on many topics?” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Warning sign: summarizing | “Are you mainly summarizing what others have to say without adding much value?” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Warning sign: word count | “Are you writing to a particular word count because you've heard or read that Google has a preferred word count? (No, we don't.)” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Warning sign: fake freshness | “Are you changing the date of pages to make them seem fresh when the content has not substantially changed?” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| SEO | “SEO can be a helpful activity when it is applied to people-first content, rather than search engine-first content.” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| E-E-A-T | “Of these aspects, trust is most important.” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| E-E-A-T is not a ranking factor | “While E-E-A-T itself isn't a specific ranking factor, using a mix of factors that can identify content with good E-E-A-T is useful.” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Effort | “Conversely, automatically generating pages from feeds or using generative AI to produce large amounts of text without manual oversight or curation represents little to no effort.” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Credit is not originality | “Attribution or giving credit to other sources doesn't replace the need for original effort.” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
| Who, How and Why | “Consider evaluating your content in terms of "Who, How, and Why" as a way to stay on course with what our systems seek to reward.” | Google docs Verified 2026-10-07 |
A checklist built from Google's questions
Using only the questions quoted above, a short pre-publish pass for any article, written by a person or with an AI tool:
- Does it provide original information or analysis, or only restate other sources?
- Is the title descriptive and free of exaggeration?
- Would you stand behind every fact, and is it clear who wrote or reviewed it?
- Is it on a topic your site has a reason to cover for its audience?
- Did a person review what automation produced before it went live?
Rules to remember
- Google says its systems prioritize helpful, reliable information created to benefit people, not content created to manipulate rankings.
- Google lists extensive automation to produce content on many topics, and mainly summarizing others, as warning signs.
- Google says it has no preferred word count and that changing dates to seem fresh is a warning sign.
Questions
Does Google have a preferred word count?
No. Google lists writing to a particular word count because you've heard that Google has a preferred word count as a warning sign, and answers: "No, we don't."
Is AI-generated content treated differently?
This page does not say AI content is banned. It lists using extensive automation to produce content on many topics as a warning sign for search engine-first content, and says generative AI used to produce large amounts of text without manual oversight or curation represents little to no effort when raters assess main content.
Is E-E-A-T a ranking factor?
Google says E-E-A-T itself isn't a specific ranking factor, but that its systems use a mix of factors that can identify content with good E-E-A-T, and that of experience, expertise, authoritativeness and trustworthiness, trust is most important.
Is it enough to credit my sources?
Google says attribution or giving credit to other sources doesn't replace the need for original effort. It asks whether content that draws on other sources avoids simply copying or rewriting them and provides substantial additional value and originality.
Should I update dates to look fresh?
Google lists changing the date of pages to make them seem fresh when the content has not substantially changed as a warning sign, and says that adding or removing a lot of content because you believe it makes your site seem fresh won't help your rankings.
Is SEO the same as search engine-first content?
No. Google says SEO can be a helpful activity when it is applied to people-first content, rather than search engine-first content.
What are the Who, How and Why questions?
Google suggests asking who created the content (is it clear who authored it, for example with a byline), how it was created, and why it was created, as a way to stay on course with what its systems seek to reward. Read Google's page for its full list of questions.
How current is this page?
Every row was read from Google's page on 2026-10-07, which showed "Last updated 2026-10-05 UTC". Google can change its documentation, so treat the linked page as the final word.
Sources
- Creating helpful, reliable, people-first content (Google Search Central), read on 2026-10-07
Let Balzac write the articles.
Type your website. Balzac finds the searches you can win, writes articles built to rank on Google and get cited by ChatGPT, and publishes them for you.
3 free articles · No card needed