Google confirms: your spam practices in AI responses can hurt e-commerce visibility
Summarize this article with AI
Google extends its spam policies to AI responses: the wake-up call
A client calls me on a Tuesday morning. He invested 8,000 USD to generate 14,000 citations on forums and directories in 2 months. His organic traffic was collapsing. He didn’t understand.
In reality, on July 8, 2025, Google quietly updated the opening paragraph of its spam policies. The new sentence, reported by Search Engine Roundtable, is crystal clear: « the Google Search spam policies also apply to generative AI responses in Google Search. »
In other words: AI Overviews, AI Mode, and any response generated by Google’s AI are now officially covered by anti-spam rules. No more gray zone. E-commerce players who thought they could flood the web with artificial links to appear in these responses just lost their safety net.
The rules are clear: if your tactic would be penalized in classic search, it will be for AI responses too.
Many sites believed AI Overviews were a new channel where the old rules didn’t apply. A wave of wild « citation building » tried to manipulate the sources Google’s AI uses. Specialized services promised quick results. You know what happened next.
With my clients, I observe a shift since April 2025: those betting on these tactics see their AI panels empty out. Others, who haven’t changed anything, gain positions. Google’s update isn’t a tsunami yet. It’s a warning. But in SEO, warnings usually precede big shocks.
My client thought his plan was brilliant: 14,000 citations in 2 months
Back to that Tuesday. The client sells premium kitchen accessories. His goal: appear in AI Overviews for queries like « best waffle maker 2025 » or « cast iron pan that doesn’t stick reviews ».
His strategy: an SEO agency that sold him a « AI visibility package ». In two months, they created 14,000 citations on forums, Q&A sites, and satellite blogs. Phrases like « According to [brand], this mold changes everything » multiplied. AI Overview traffic climbed to 9,000 monthly visits. Then June arrived.
An algorithm update, combined with the spam policy clarification, hit like a guillotine. AI traffic plummeted to 120 visits. Even classic search collapsed. The site lost 47 first-page queries in a week.
Why? Because the artificial citations had become toxic signals. Google identified the pattern: mass links from low-authority domains, identical anchors, automatically generated content with no value. The client wasn’t even aware of the problem’s scale. He thought he was playing by the rules.
I analyzed his 800 product pages one by one. 60% had no originality. The sheets were duplicated among themselves. Citation content was often the same text, just reworded. We rebuilt everything: disavowed toxic links, rewrote key pages, removed duplicate content. Result: 14 months later, organic traffic rebounded 820% from the low point. AI Overviews returned, but this time on the basis of real content.
What the update really changes for e-commerce players
Google’s announcement is not a technical revolution. It’s a legal clarification. Before, spam guidelines didn’t explicitly mention AI responses. Some saw it as a blind spot. Now, it’s written.
What does this imply? That all practices forbidden in classic SEO are also forbidden for appearing in AI Overviews. We’re talking about:
- Link schemes: buying links or building site networks to be cited as a source in the AI.
- Automatically generated content with no added value, created solely to feed Google’s algorithm.
- Misleading structured data: FAQ or HowTo markup that has no real correspondence on the page, just to trigger rich displays later read by the AI.
- Cloaking or hidden redirects: showing different content to Google’s bots and users.
For an e-commerce site, this means your product sheets must not be a copy-paste from the supplier. If you publish 10,000 duplicate sheets with an AI generative layer on top, Google can now ignore your pages in AI responses. And if you’ve tried to manipulate citations, the penalty can be wider.
It’s good news for those producing original pages. Where cheaters retreat, real value gains ground. I observe across several clients a clear phenomenon: their spammy competitors disappear from AI panels, and their own appear without any changes. Simply because they’ve followed the rules from the start.
The 3 tactics that make you lose AI Overviews without knowing it
I see dozens of e-commerce sites per month. Some mean no harm. Yet three practices keep showing up among those who suddenly vanish from AI panels:
1. Artificial citation stuffing. Most common. An e-commerce player buys mentions on « consumer advice » sites, forums, directories. The idea is to make Google believe their page is a reference. But Google now reads these patterns: over-optimized anchors, exponential volume of mentions in short time, sites without reputation. Result: the penalty doesn’t just hit the link, it erases the page from AI Overviews.
2. « AI FAQ » pages generated in bulk. A sports nutrition client created 300 pages with ChatGPT-generated questions and reworded answers. Goal: capture all variations of « what supplement for post-workout recovery ». Google indexed them, then removed them. None of these pages appear in AI Overviews. Why? Low-value content, no human expertise, perceived as generative spam.
3. Injecting irrelevant structured data. Adding FAQ or HowTo schema to product pages when the page doesn’t really ask questions. The user sees « How to clean cast iron cookware? » on the product sheet, but the body discusses price. Google eventually devalues all structured data on the site, including the ones that could legitimately generate excerpts in the AI.
In all three cases, the mechanism is the same: you’re trying to automate trust. But Google now measures coherence between content, its structure, and real intent. Loopholes close one by one. And those playing fair come out ahead.
Why e-commerce SEO wins by playing fair with Google’s AI
Stop seeing this update as a constraint. It’s a chance to stand out. While your competitors keep pouring empty links into the web, you can build pages that become real sources.
A client in power tools proves it. Zero bought citations. Zero auto-generated pages. We simply structured his 450 product sheets around semantic clusters: each product answers at least 20 real user questions. We worked the intent behind each keyword. Result? Three of his pages are now sources in 12 different AI Overviews. Without specific AI effort. Simply because Google judged them expert and useful.
When spam policies apply to AI, it rewards sites bringing value. Google always said E-E-A-T (Expérience, Expertise, Authority, Trust) guided its algorithms. Now it’s explicit for AI too. Content written by product specialists, with detailed customer reviews, tests, unique photos: that’s what feeds generative responses.
I also see that recent Google updates penalize e-commerce sites with strong semantic internal linking less. In the last June core update, a site with 1,200 interconnected pages through clusters saw traffic grow 17%. In the same sector, another using link tactics lost 38%. The direction is clear.
Build a system that lasts, even when Google changes the rules
You know I don’t believe in magic recipes. I forge architectures. The only thing that survives updates is semantic coherence.
For my clients, I work on what I call clusters: groups of pages treating a topic exhaustively. A pillar page federates a set of pages dedicated to user questions. Each page links to the others with relevant anchors. The system is so solid that when Google changes how it generates AI responses, pages stay cited because they’re truly the best sources.
Take a page on « choosing a circular saw ». It doesn’t just pile keywords. It answers 47 specific concerns: power, blade, safety, use, brands. It contains sourced reviews, comparisons, links to video tutorials. It’s not a product page, it’s a guide. And AI Overviews love this structure. I’ve tracked it across 5 different sites: a well-structured pillar page naturally generates citations in 3 to 5 AI responses.
When Google updates its spam policies, this type of content slides through without a scratch. Why? Because it never tried to cheat. Value precedes technique. It’s a principle I apply to all my audits.
You can build the same for your e-commerce. Stop producing empty sheets, stop buying links. Invest in clusters. The return is longer, but it never collapses overnight.
Do your pages pass a spam policy check?
I usually end a client call with this question. It sometimes triggers silence. But it’s the most useful.
In 2026, visibility in Google’s AI responses won’t be decreed with a script or a 99 USD/month service. It’ll be earned through true, structured, useful content. Spam policies are the guarantee that work pays.
If you’ve already invested in questionable link building or auto-generated content, it’s not too late to fix it. Clean up, restructure, disavow. Then build clean. You’ll sleep better. And so will your analytics.
Is your site ready for AI Overviews?
I offer a live audit of your site in a call. In 1 hour, I show you what blocks your visibility in AI responses and how to fix it. 100% concrete, no pitch.
Book a strategic call — 45 minFrequently Asked Questions
Can Google penalize my site if a competitor sends spam links to my pages?
Yes, it can affect you indirectly, especially if you don’t disavow those links. Monitor your backlinks via Search Console. If you see a surge of suspicious links, disavow them quickly. Google is supposed to recognize negative SEO attacks, but it’s better to be cautious.
How do I check if my traffic from AI Overviews has been impacted?
If you use Google Search Console, clicks from AI Overviews are reported. A sudden drop without a decline in traditional ranking can signal an issue. Compare to the previous period. If traffic disappears, look for artificial links or duplicate content on your site.
Are product reviews written or assisted by AI now considered spam?
Not necessarily. The rule is about intent. If you generate hundreds of reviews solely to influence AI Overviews, without reflecting real expérience, you’re in violation. But an AI review reviewed and contextualized by a human, useful to the buyer, isn’t targeted.
Should I delete all automatically created FAQ pages on my e-commerce site?
If those pages add no unique value and never generated traffic, yes, it’s better to clean them up. If some answer real customer questions, enrich them with human expertise and original data. A quality FAQ page has a rightful place.
How long does it take to recover visibility in AI Overviews after cleaning up a site?
Based on my expérience with 3 sites, it can take 6 to 14 months. It depends on the severity of the spam. Disavow links, improve content, and build new semantic clusters. Patience is essential.
