Google’s new AI Overviews (AIO) feature has drawn criticism from search marketers and content creators alike for how the AI technology may be undermining the very principles Google claims to uphold. By rewriting web content into full-length answers without offering new insights or added value, AIO may be crossing the line into what Google itself defines as spam.
Previously, Google’s Featured Snippets offered users a preview of an article, encouraging clicks to the original source for more information. But Google AI Overviews go much further. Instead of excerpts, Google deliver entire responses by summarizing and repackaging existing web content.
The problem is that AI is repurposing other people’s work instead of writing its own original answers. If a student were to do something like this in a classroom, it would be called plagiarism.
Google has long emphasized the importance of content that demonstrates originality, insight, and expertise which are the the pillars of its E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, and Trustworthiness) framework. However, AIO-generated content appears to contradict these standards.
AI can’t provide lived experience or nuanced analysis. Instead, it pulls from multiple sources, rewrites the information, and presents it as a unified answer. That’s a clear violation of what Google traditionally considers high-quality content.
As one industry professional put it: “Why put the effort into writing great content if it’s going to be rewritten into a complete answer that removes the incentive to click the cited source?”
SEO expert Lily Ray recently shared her findings after publishing an article highlighting spam issues within AI Overviews. Not only was her article not featured — it was rewritten by Google’s AI into an answer nearly as long as the original post.
Her tweet summed it up:
“It re-wrote everything I wrote in a post that’s basically as long as my original post.”
It re-wrote everything I wrote in a post that’s basically as long as my original post ☠️ pic.twitter.com/ucNCSMHsY4
— Lily Ray 😏 (@lilyraynyc) May 18, 2025
What’s even more troubling is that AIO seems to “synthesize” content from multiple sources, creating responses that pull from more than one article, without adding any real analysis.
In Lily’s case, AIO even contradicted her original viewpoint by blending in claims from another article that defended Google’s spam prevention efforts. This blending, while presented as helpful, actually distorts the intent and argument of the original authors.
It’s hard not to see this as a high-tech version of the scraper sites Google has fought against for years. Only now, it’s Google doing the scraping.
This issue goes beyond SEO rankings or traffic dips. It speaks to the value of human-created content on the web. If Google’s AI is generating full-length, citation-free responses that replace the need to click through, what’s the incentive for creators to continue publishing high-quality work?
Here are the key concerns:
- Loss of originality: AIO rewrites content without offering new ideas or context.
- Violation of E-E-A-T principles: AI cannot demonstrate experience or insight.
- Decreased traffic for creators: Users are less likely to visit the original site if they get a full answer on the SERP.
- Questionable use of sources: AIO appears to plagiarize from multiple documents, combining ideas without credit or analysis.
Google’s AI Overviews are changing how people consume content but at what cost? If the feature continues to blur the lines between summarizing and scraping, it could damage not only publisher trust but the long-term quality of information on the web.
For now, it’s fair to ask: Is Google violating its own spam policies? And if so, what does that mean for the future of search?
