Sorry HCU-hit publishers, your websites may never recover after all

Google regularly rolls out algorithm updates to combat spam in its Search results. However, in September last year, Google’s Helpful Content Update (HCU) wreaked havoc on more than just your regular spam websites. Hundreds of niche sites catering to gamers, tech enthusiasts, and more had their worlds turned upside down within a couple of weeks. The sharp drop in the number of visits to their websites directly resulted in many writers losing jobs. Heck, in some cases whole websites had to stop operations because Google suddenly woke up and decided that these websites weren’t serving “helpful” content.

What’s worse is the fact that Google, to this date, hasn’t exactly provided any specifics to affected webmasters about what exactly resulted in Google practically kicking them out of Search results. Some website owners even spent large chunks of their drying-up revenue with the hopes of fixing any SEO issues that might have resulted in Google punishing them but to no avail. Now, in what might be the biggest blow apart from the initial shake-up, Google has basically told webmasters at the recent 2024 Web Creator Summit that those affected shouldn’t count on a recovery anytime soon, as highlighted by Search Engine Roundtable.

What went down at the Web Creator Summit

At the 2024 Web Creator Summit, hosted at Google’s headquarters, attendees sought answers directly from Google’s search team, including VP of Search Pandu Nayak and Search Liaison Danny Sullivan. Many HCU-impacted publishers hoped this in-person interaction might reveal a pathway to recovery. Instead, Google’s response was disheartening: rather than issuing clear solutions, the company seemed to confirm that for many, recovery was unlikely. So yes, it’s fair to assume that the many year’s worth of effort of some webmasters is pretty much going down the drain.

During a Q&A, Nayak sympathized with publishers, expressing his regret about the impact but declined to offer concrete steps for improving site rankings. His message was that the changes were necessary for improving user experience, although he acknowledged that it left many sites in a challenging position. Sullivan confirmed that Google’s current priorities are focused on overall search quality, and unfortunately, this means that not every site will bounce back. Naturally, many creators at the event took to X to share the disappointing news:

Struggles and frustrations shared by publishers

For many publishers, the HCU has felt like a tipping point in the ongoing struggle for visibility. Smaller sites, like House Fresh and Retro Dodo, weren’t alone in seeing sharp drops in search traffic and visibility. Across the industry, publishers have repeatedly asked Google for a clear definition of what it considers “helpful” content, hoping to adapt and recover. But Google’s guidance has remained somewhat vague, leaving content creators guessing at what adjustments will truly make a difference.

Ready Steady Cut’s editor, Daniel Hart, has also been vocal about the situation. He took to X to share his thoughts on the information coming out from the event too:

At the summit, Google’s Danny Sullivan aimed to clarify, explaining that ranking adjustments aren’t site-wide demotions but rather individual page re-rankings based on perceived content quality. Mike Hardaker from Mountain Weekly News attended the summit, where Sullivan reiterated that Google’s algorithm ranks each page separately rather than applying broad penalties to entire websites. However, many in attendance, including Hardaker, pushed back, arguing that the dramatic, site-wide ranking declines following the HCU seemed to contradict this claim.

Adding to the frustration, some attendees speculated that Google’s algorithm seems to favor larger, established brands at the expense of smaller sites. When smaller publishers raised concerns about alleged preferential treatment, Google’s representatives avoided directly addressing these accusations. For a more detailed account of all that went down at the Web Creator Summit, you can check out Mike Hardaker’s blog post.

Google Search’s shift to AI and its impact on small publishers

Sullivan noted at the summit that the entire landscape of Google Search has evolved in the past year, particularly with the introduction of AI in search features. He advised publishers not to hold onto pre-2023 traffic levels, suggesting that the current format of search results no longer benefits every site equally. With AI-generated snippets and visual overhauls, Google’s search has pivoted, and it’s likely that smaller publishers may continue to lose ground to bigger, AI-enhanced search features.

This shift could be particularly devastating for niche sites, including our own. A well-positioned feature snippet or answer card could mean the difference between thousands of clicks and none. Smaller publishers have little control over whether Google chooses to display their content prominently. Worse, they’re competing against content that may be directly enhanced by Google’s AI, leaving them increasingly marginalized in search results.

While there are ways to disable Google’s AI Overviews, these methods often involve a little more input from users. So a vast majority of Search users won’t really want to go through the trouble of getting rid of it. This essentially means that publishers are at the mercy of Google to provide proper credits to them if information from their articles are used in the AI Overviews. But even then, the chances of users clicking on the link for further details are likely reduced. I’ve often found myself not having to click on links when Google basically summarizes the main information right away. And I’m assuming that I’m not alone here.

Is recovery entirely out of reach?

Despite the bleak outlook, Google representatives like Sullivan hinted at a “gradual process” for those hoping to regain traffic. However, he tempered this statement by emphasizing that updates aimed at increasing fairness might take months or years to fully implement. Essentially, all this means is that even Google doesn’t have a clear answer. But what’s certain is that a lot of sites that were hit with the update aren’t coming back, unless affected webmasters have pockets as deep as Google to continue running their websites indefinitely.

The HCU serves as a stark reminder that publishers can no longer rely solely on search engines as their lifeblood. Google has made it clear that it decides who the winners and losers are in the industry. Granted that almost no affected website has seen any significant recovery, it’s hard to even have hopes for a change. This massive blunder by Google might be one of the many reasons the company might see itself going down the path of Yahoo.

What’s next for small publishers?

Since Google has chosen not to undo the damage done with last year’s HCU, affected publishers don’t really have many options. You can either continue with a downsized team or just throw in the towel. Maybe, just maybe, the growing competition in the AI search engine race might help affected websites get more exposure on other platforms. For instance, there’s already clear evidence that OpenAI’s SearchGPT is much better at crediting sources, even those affected by the HCU, compared to Google Search’s AI Overviews.

As search competition heats up, it will be interesting to see if Google’s approach adapts to prevent further attrition among smaller publishers or if these emerging search engines become the go-to platforms for those seeking fairer exposure.

Featured image credits: AI-generated / Microsoft Designer