What factors does Google consider when determining the quality of content?

For more than 20 years, I’ve watched one simple truth play out over and over again: when you write for algorithms, you lose. When you write for humans first—and understand how algorithms reward that—you win, and you keep winning.

That’s exactly why our article “What factors does Google consider when determining the quality of content?” took off so quickly. It wasn’t because we tried to “game” Google. It was because we focused on the reader’s real problem:

“How do I create content that Google trusts—and that my audience actually wants to read?”

In the last year, something new has entered this conversation: Generative Engine Optimization (GEO). Search is no longer just blue links. People are getting answers from AI overviews, chatbots, and other generative experiences. So the question has changed slightly:

“How do I create content that real people and generative engines both recognize as the best possible answer?”

Let me walk you through what I’ve learned—through mistakes, experiments, and years of watching what works across hundreds of brands—and how you should think about content quality today.

Not theory. Real lessons, real examples, and a clear direction you can execute on.

What Google really means by “high-quality content” (beyond the buzzwords)

Let’s strip away all the jargon. When Google’s systems evaluate content quality, they’re trying to answer a few practical questions:

1. Can we trust this content?

2. Does it actually help solve a real problem?

3. Is it better than the other options we could show?

Everything else—EEAT, Page Experience, helpful content, spam updates—is simply Google’s way of systematizing those questions at scale.

I learned this the hard way around 2012–2014. Back then, content agencies (including us, briefly) were obsessed with keyword density, exact-match anchors, and mass publishing. One client in the finance niche was pushing us to “just create more pages with every variation of the keyword.” Traffic shot up for six months. Then a quality update rolled out, and 60% of that traffic vanished overnight.

Why? Because none of those pages were truly better than what else existed on the web. They were technically “SEO-friendly” but practically useless.

That was the turning point for us as an agency. We shifted our question from “How do we rank?” to “What would it take for someone to search, land on this page, and feel zero need to go back to Google?”

That’s still the right question—only now it applies not just to search results, but also to AI-powered experiences that summarize and recommend content.

The core factors Google and generative engines care about today

Let’s break the big idea into clear, usable components. In practice, Google and generative engines look at a combination of:

1. Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trust (EEAT)

2. Depth and usefulness of the content

3. Originality and uniqueness (not just rephrased material)

4. User engagement and satisfaction signals

5. On-page clarity and structure

6. Brand consistency and topical focus

7. Technical cleanliness and accessibility

All of this may sound abstract, so I’ll show you what it looks like from the perspective of real brands and founders who’ve done this right.

1. Experience and expertise: Why “who is speaking” now matters more than ever

If you want both Google and generative engines to consistently favor your content, your experience has to be visible—not just assumed.

Take Dr. Peter Attia in the health and longevity space. Thousands of blogs write about fasting, training, and nutrition. But when you search for topics in his domain, his content is repeatedly mentioned, linked, and surfaced. Why?

Because:

• He has direct, real-world experience as a practicing physician.

• His content is not generic—he references patients (anonymized), his experiments, his failures, what he got wrong in the past.

• His name and reputation are tied to the work; he’s not hiding behind faceless “SEO articles.”

When gen AI tools scan the web to synthesize answers, his work is a strong candidate because it’s clearly grounded in reality and experience. That’s EEAT in practice.

How to apply this as a brand or founder:

• Put a real name and face on your most important content.

• Add specific experience: “In scaling my Shopify brand from $0 to $5M, here’s what we tried, what failed, and what finally worked.”

• Don’t be afraid to say: “Here’s a mistake I made” or “Here’s what I changed my mind about.” Paradoxically, this builds trust.

A good example is Rand Fishkin, former CEO of Moz and now SparkToro. For years he openly published the things that didn’t work in SEO—the experiments that failed, the predictions that were wrong. That “transparent track record” is one reason both humans and machines treat him as a high-authority source today.

2. Depth and problem-solving: Does your content genuinely end the search?

If you’re still writing 800-word “what is X” posts that could have been a dictionary definition, you’re already behind.

The content that survives Google updates—and that generative models pull from—does something specific: it resolves the searcher’s problem to the point they don’t have to open multiple tabs.

Look at Ahrefs’ content. Their article on “keyword research” is not a shallow list of bullet points. It:

• Walks through detailed workflows using real tools and screenshots.

• Shows step-by-step examples with real keywords and real sites.

• Addresses beginner, intermediate, and advanced questions in one place.

This has two effects:

• Google detects that users don’t “pogo-stick” back to the results page as often.

• Generative engines see this page as a dense cluster of answers, examples, and context.

When we rewrote content for a B2B SaaS client in the HR tech space, we stopped publishing thin “overview” posts. Instead, for each core topic (like “how to implement a performance review system”), we:

• Interviewed their head of HR and early customers.

• Captured actual templates they used internally.

• Added scenarios: What to do if your team is remote, if your culture is toxic, if your manager is resistant.

Within six months, traffic grew, but more importantly, demo requests increased because the content wasn’t just ranking—it was doing sales enablement by solving specific problems.

Ask yourself honestly for each page:
“If a smart but busy person came here, could they skip three other search results because I’ve already answered everything they need—and showed them what to do next?”

If the answer is no, your content isn’t ready yet.

3. Originality: Not just “unique wording,” but unique contribution

Today, a lot of content is written by AI and lightly edited. Generative engines are not stupid; they’re literally trained on patterns of language at Internet scale. If your article is just a rephrased blend of the top 10 Google results, it will read as noise.

Originality doesn’t mean you need an idea no one has ever had before. It means your piece adds something the others don’t:

• Data or numbers from your experience

• A story only you can tell

• A contrarian angle (with evidence)

• A framework or process you’ve developed and tested

Look at Basecamp and their founders, Jason Fried and David Heinemeier Hansson. When everyone in SaaS chased “hypergrowth” and “blitzscaling,” they wrote clearly against that trend: calm companies, no venture capital, small teams, profitability. Same topics (software, startups, productivity), but a unique lens.

Result: their content keeps getting quoted and linked because it’s distinct. When AI systems build answers, they pull from these “signal sources” that stand out.

When we work with clients at Chedir, I always ask:
“What do you believe that your competitors either disagree with or are too afraid to say out loud?”

The answer to that question usually becomes the anchor for genuinely original content.

4. Engagement and satisfaction: The signals that Google never fully spells out

Google never reveals the complete formula, but across hundreds of campaigns I’ve run, some patterns are clear:

• Content that keeps people on the page longer, scrolling, interacting, and not bouncing back too quickly tends to survive updates better.

• Content that gets bookmarked, shared, and linked because “this actually helped me” becomes a magnet for authority signals.

Take HubSpot’s blog in the early days. They didn’t just produce SEO content. They produced “I’m going to bookmark this” guides:

• Long-form playbooks with templates.

• Specific examples.

• Downloadable resources.

It wasn’t just about keywords. It was about becoming the final stop for that search.

On the other side, I’ve seen brands publish hundreds of AI-written articles that technically answer the query but don’t make anyone feel smarter or more confident. They get some traffic at first, then slowly sink as Google and users both lose interest.

So when you create content, ask:

• Would someone send this to a colleague and say, “This explains it perfectly”?

• Would someone keep this open in a tab while they work through the steps?

If not, it may be content, but it is not quality content in Google’s sense.

5. On-page clarity and structure: Why “readable” wins over “clever”
   

There’s an old mistake I made early in my career: trying to sound smart instead of being clear.

I would write complex sentences, heavy intros, and “clever” metaphors. What I eventually saw in the data:

• People dropped off halfway down the page.

• Scroll depth was shallow.

• Time on page was mediocre.

Once we started breaking content into:

• Clear headings that mirror the reader’s questions,

• Shorter paragraphs,

• Logical progression from “what” to “why” to “how” to “now what,”

engagement went up—consistently.

A good reference is how Stripe structures its documentation and guides. Even when explaining very technical concepts, the structure is:

• What is this?

• When should you use it?

• How does it work?

• Clear code examples.

• Edge cases and FAQs.

Search engines and generative engines both love this kind of format because:

• It’s easy to crawl and understand the hierarchy.

• It maps neatly to question-answer pairs.

• It’s easy for models to extract clean, coherent segments.

If you want your content to surface in AI answers and Google snippets, structure it so that each major question a user might ask has a clearly marked section with a complete, direct answer.

6. Brand and topical focus: Depth beats scattered volume

Another mistake many founders and marketers make (including me, in my early agency days) is trying to write about everything even slightly related to their niche.

We once worked with a small SaaS tool in the project management space. Their blog covered:

• Productivity,

• Remote work,

• HR issues,

• Team culture,

• Even general entrepreneurship topics.

Traffic was okay but unfocused. Search engines saw them as “yet another general business blog.”

When we narrowed their content strategy to three core topical clusters:

• Project management methods,

• Team collaboration workflows,

• Implementation and adoption stories from real customers,

their authority in that space grew. They became a recognized source on that narrow set of questions.

Google’s systems and generative models both look for:
“Who consistently publishes strong, detailed content about this topic specifically?”

Think about how Backlinko built authority: Brian Dean didn’t chase every marketing topic under the sun. He became obsessive about SEO techniques, link building, on-page optimization. Same with NerdWallet in the personal finance space: an almost obsessive focus on money decisions.

For your brand, ask:

• What 3–5 problem areas do we want to be known for, beyond any doubt?

• Are we going deep enough in those areas to become an obvious, trusted source—

not just for humans, but for AI systems picking reference content?

When your topical focus is clear, your new content becomes easier to rank and more likely to be used as a reference for generative engines.

7. Technical quality and accessibility: The invisible but essential layer

People often underestimate how much technical basics affect perceived content quality.

Over the years, I’ve seen plenty of great articles underperform because:

• Pages loaded slowly.

• Mobile experience was clumsy.

• Important sections were buried in messy HTML.

• Internal links were broken or non-existent.

Meanwhile, brands like Shopify, Notion, and Intercom invest heavily in:

• Fast, clean page loads,

• Responsiveness on all devices,

• Logical internal linking between related articles,

• Clear meta titles and descriptions.

When Google or an AI model crawls your site, these elements help:

• Identify what your content is about,

• Group related topics,

• Trust that this is a “maintained” asset, not a dead content farm.

Technical quality doesn’t impress users consciously, but it removes friction and helps your content send the right signals.

Generative Engine Optimization (GEO): What’s actually changing, and what isn’t

Generative Engine Optimization is a new term, but it’s not a new game. It’s still about quality and trust—but in a world where machines synthesize answers, not just list links.

Here’s what is changing:

• AI systems produce summaries and direct answers at the top of search.

• Those systems are using large corpora of web content to train and ground responses.

• Content that is clearly structured, deeply helpful, and well-referenced is more likely to be surfaced, quoted, or linked in generative outputs.

And here’s what is not changing:

• Thin, derivative content will still be ignored or devalued.

• Real expertise and originality still stand out.

• Satisfying the reader’s intent is still the ultimate goal.

In practical terms, if you want your content to work for GEO:

• Write in clear Q&A structures where appropriate.

• Make your headings look like the questions your audience genuinely asks.

• Provide complete, stand-alone answers under each major question.

• Include your unique stories, data, and experiments so your content isn’t just a copy of the top results.

Think about how many AI answers start with something like:
“According to [Brand]…” or “A guide from [Company] explains…”

Your goal is to be that source—not because you “optimized for AI,” but because you created the most trustworthy, structured, and useful resource in your category.

How our “Google quality factors” article succeeded—and how we’re evolving it now

When we first published our article on “What factors does Google consider when determining the quality of content?”, we focused on three things:

1. Explaining quality in plain language, not Google-speak.

2. Connecting the guidelines to real publishing and business decisions.

3. Giving our honest perspective from years of watching sites rise and fall with each update.

That authenticity resonated. Readers stayed, shared, and came back. That’s why it worked.

Today, as we refresh it, we’re doing what we advise our clients to do:

• Updating for the generative era
  We’re not rewriting for keywords; we’re tightening the match with real user questions:
  “How do I future-proof my content in an AI-driven search world?”
  “How do I avoid penalties while still using AI tools?”
  “How do I create content my customers actually finish and act on?”

• Bringing in concrete stories and mistakes
  We’re not pretending we always got it right. Over two decades, I’ve:
  – Chased volume instead of value and watched traffic crumble.
  – Helped brands recover by cutting 50% of their dead content and doubling down on 10% that truly helped people.
  – Seen teams rely blindly on AI tools and produce hundreds of articles that looked good on a spreadsheet but fell flat with real users.

Those lessons now shape our approach—and they shape how this topic should be discussed.

• Writing for humans, respectful of algorithms
  We’re not here to “game Google” or “trick AI systems.”
  We’re here to help you build a content engine that:
  – Attracts search traffic,
  – Earns placement in generative answers,
  – And most importantly, actually solves the reader’s problem so they trust your brand and come back.

What you should do next if you’re serious about content quality

If you’re reading this as a founder, marketer, or content lead, here’s the simplest roadmap I can give you, based on 20 years of experiments and scars:

1. Choose your zones of authority
   Pick the 3–5 topics you are willing to become world-class at. Not “we could write about this,” but “we are uniquely positioned to talk about this better than most.”

2. Audit your existing content honestly
   Which pages:

• Keep people on the site?

• Drive leads or sales?

• Get referenced or linked?
  You will find that a small percentage of your content does most of the work. Protect and improve those. Don’t be afraid to merge, redirect, or delete low-value pieces.

3. Turn your experience into visible proof
   Bring your founder stories, client failures, and wins into your articles:

• “Here’s what we tried and why it didn’t work.”

• “Here’s the exact process that finally did.”
  This is the kind of thing generative engines can’t fabricate convincingly—and it’s what human readers crave.

4. Design every article to end the search
   Before you publish, ask:
   “If I were the reader, would I feel like I could close Google and get to work now?”
   If not, go deeper, clarify, or restructure.

5. Use AI as an assistant, not a ghostwriter
   AI is excellent for:

• Outlining,

• Brainstorming angles,

• Summarizing transcripts or data.
  But the voice, insight, and real substance should come from you and your team. That’s what creates durable content quality and helps you stand out in a generative world.

Our conviction at Chedir

At Chedir, we don’t promise you “viral posts” or “overnight rankings.” We build content assets that:

• Survive algorithm updates,

• Earn trust from both humans and machines,

• And move your business forward, not just your traffic chart.

We’ve made the mistakes. We’ve published the wrong content for the wrong reasons and paid the price. We’ve also seen what happens when a brand commits to quality the way Google defines it: trustworthy, experience-backed, problem-solving content.

Generative engines are not your enemy. They are simply another layer evaluating the same thing Google always cared about:

“Is this, honestly, one of the best answers available on this topic?”

If you’re ready to create that kind of content, not just more content, that’s where we come in.