Everyone tells you to write helpful content. Almost nobody tells you what that means on an actual page. Google quietly filled in part of that answer last week.

Connect on LinkedIn · Visit my site

Search Engine Land's writer Barry Schwartz reported that Google added new language to its people-first content guide. The addition puts the quality of a page's main content near the top of what matters. Google didn't announce the change in the documentation itself.

Google's wording says this goes beyond E-E-A-T, which stands for experience, expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness. Those four describe who is behind a page. Main content is about the page itself and how well it does its job for the reader.

Google defines main content as any part of the page that directly helps it do its job. That includes more than the article text.

So a spec tab counts. So does a payment calculator on a vehicle page, if that's what the page exists to help someone do.

Google also laid out four attributes its Search Quality Raters are trained to evaluate. Here they are in plain English.

Effort is how much human work went into the content or the systems behind it. Google's high-effort examples include original analysis, translating a poem by hand, and building a custom interactive map for a game.

Its low-effort examples are pages generated automatically from feeds, and large amounts of AI text with no manual oversight or curation. Crediting your sources doesn't make up for that.

I wrote about a similar warning on mass-produced AI content a few weeks ago.

Originality asks whether your content offers information or perspectives that aren't already on other sites. A page that repeats what is already on 10 other sites doesn't have much to offer on that front.

Talent or skill is about whether the content shows the ability to give visitors a good experience. Think clear writing, well-produced video, or page tools that actually work. Google adds that not every page needs specialized expertise, and someone sharing how they found a better way to clear snow from a driveway doesn't need credentials.

Accuracy means informational pages should be factually correct. For topics that could significantly affect someone's life or well-being, often called YMYL for "your money or your life," the bar is higher. That content must be highly accurate and match established expert consensus.

Schwartz notes that Google hadn't updated this document in a long time. Google also didn't call out the change in the documentation, though it did announce changes to its separate AI-generated content guidance.

Documentation updates sometimes come with algorithm or policy changes. A spam update is rolling out right now, but Schwartz says he can't confirm the two are connected.

I wouldn't read this as a new ranking switch. I'd read it as Google telling you how it wants content to be judged, which is useful whether or not an update is attached.

Pick the pages that bring in leads or sales. For each one, ask four questions. Who did the work, what here can't be found elsewhere, does it do its job well, and is every fact right?

If a page relies on a calculator, a spec tab, or customer reviews, treat them as part of the content Google evaluates. Make sure they work, they're easy to find, and the reviews are real. A broken tool or an empty review section weakens a page that otherwise looks fine.

Google's example of low effort is AI text produced with no manual oversight or curation. Its wording points at the missing oversight, not at the tool. Add something only you have, like real prices, local details, photos you took, or a lesson from a job you did, and check every fact before you publish.

Did You Know? Google's own example of content that doesn't need specialized expertise is a person sharing how they found a new way to clear snow from their driveway.

Most quality advice stays vague because quality is hard to define. What I like about this update is that it names the part nobody can fake: the human work behind the page. A competitor can copy your topic, your headings, and even your tone, but not the effort.

I don't know whether this connects to the spam update, and Schwartz says he can't confirm it either. Either way, it's a good question to ask about every page you publish: what did a person actually put into this?

Till next time,

Source