As a Profound customer, I’m excited to share that I can now clearly see where my site and pages stand in terms of AI citations compared to other peers in the Profound Agent Analytics Network.
This feature empowers me with detailed insights, allowing for a competitive analysis that helps in enhancing my digital strategy and boosting my AI visibility effectively.
Inspired by this post on Try Profound Blog.
These days, simply fixing technical SEO issues on my site isn’t enough to make a significant impact.
When my site achieves technical parity with competitors, the ranking focus shifts from infrastructure to relevance. Google evaluates relevance based on how well my content aligns with search intent.
Let’s explore how I can make my site more relevant.
An intent mismatch happens when the content on my page doesn’t meet user expectations. If the page isn’t relevant or the signals sent are mixed, it results in poor behavior signals, like users bouncing off the page without finding answers.
These signals suggest to Google that my page doesn’t satisfy the query, causing ranking drops, fewer users viewing the page, and worsening behavior signals. It’s a situation that technical SEO alone won’t solve.
Initially, when I start an SEO strategy, improvements come quickly. If my website lags in technical standards, resolving crawl errors, addressing duplicate content, boosting page speed, and adding schema can result in significant gains.
However, once these changes place my site on par with competitors, Google evaluates sites based on user query satisfaction. Now, my technical foundation is solid, but the rules have changed.
Intent alignment becomes the primary improvement focus here.
Various elements affect a page’s intent and Google’s decision on whether it matches. These include:
My CTR can be influenced by factors like my title tag, meta description, URL structure, and schema, all measured against intent.
If my title tag is well-optimized yet mismatched with user queries, CTR will drop. Google sees low CTR as a relevance signal and adjusts rankings.
Intent misalignment can harm time-on-page, scroll depth, and interaction rates. A user searching to purchase something might exit immediately if they land on a how-to guide. Similarly, a user seeking an emergency plumber might bounce from a page lacking contact details.
LCP, INP, and CLS measure page load speed. A slow transactional page frustrates users ready to buy, whereas informational article readers are more patient.
While CWV thresholds matter everywhere, they heavily impact conversion and behavior on high-intent pages.
Schema markup explicitly tells Google the page content type. Contradictory content and schema signals send Google a wrong intent signal, affecting traffic.
Internal link anchor text informs Google about the linked page’s intent. If a transactional page’s links use informational text like “learn more about X,” intent signals get diluted.
Google uses URL patterns to infer page type. For instance, URLs in /blog/ are seen as informational. A product page in a blog path may struggle with ranking expectations.
Multiple pages targeting the same keyword with different intents dilute Google’s signal, hindering ranking. Using canonical tags can emphasize the preferred page for a keyword, consolidating or redirecting when necessary.
Let’s consider a common intent mismatch and steps I can take to audit and fix it.
If someone searches for “financial analysis software,” they intend to purchase software, a highly transactional query. Targeting this keyword with an informational blog post explaining DIY analysis creates a mismatch.
These users want to compare features and pricing or book a demo. Therefore, targeting the keyword with a dedicated page outlining features and pricing is optimal, aligning with user needs and boosting conversions.
To remedy intent mismatches, I start by compiling top-performing keywords and manually checking their Google rankings. This research shows what type of page and content best suits these keywords.
By researching competitors’ pages targeting my keywords, I note elements they include, such as tables, comparisons, or videos, which can inform improvements on my pages.
After making page improvements, I track performance indicators like clicks, rankings, and time on page to evaluate the effectiveness of changes.
Technical SEO is vital; it lays the groundwork. Pages that aren’t properly crawled won’t rank to their full potential, regardless of intent alignment.
Intent alignment, however, dictates how high a technically sound page can rank and its conversion rate. Every page should have clearly defined intent supported by technical signals for reinforcement.
Inspired by this post on Search Engine Land.
I find it fascinating that Google’s Universal Commerce Protocol (UCP), which was initially limited to AI Mode, is now expanding into regular search results. It’s not just a fleeting trend; some retailers have already begun integrating this technology into their listing pages, making our online shopping experience even more intuitive.
Earlier this year, Google rolled out UCP for AI-agents to facilitate direct purchases from search results. It first launched exclusively within Google’s AI Mode but now, we’re seeing it implemented in Google’s main search results for retailers who support UCP.
Discovering what the UCP checkout looks like was made easier thanks to a post by Brodie Clark. He shared a screenshot showing how Wayfair’s listings on Google Search now feature a UCP-powered ‘Buy’ button. This button is a game-changer because it allows purchases directly from Google’s interface without navigating to Wayfair’s website.
The UCP protocol is paving the way for seamless transactions by establishing a common language for AI agents and commerce systems. No longer do we have to worry about bespoke integrations across different platforms.
Collaboratively developed with big names like Shopify, Etsy, Wayfair, and Target, UCP aligns with existing standards, such as Agent2Agent and Agent Payments Protocols, creating a more cohesive digital commerce space.
What really excites me is the potential for profit growth for retailers who embrace this technology. Although Wayfair might miss out on direct site traffic for specific searches, their affiliation with Google through UCP can still result in conversions.
While it’s clear that not everyone will bypass the traditional shopping journey, as many of us still prefer exploring products on the retailer’s site, the option to ‘Buy’ directly adds a layer of convenience. It’s definitely something worth monitoring as its prevalence in search results increases.
Inspired by this post on Search Engine Land.
It feels like a moment of relief as Google recently announced a resolution to a longstanding data logging issue within Google Search Console. This glitch affected data between May 13, 2025, and April 27, 2026, spanning approximately 50 weeks. However, it’s important to note that while the root cause has been addressed, historical data from this period remains unfixed.
Google shared this update in a rather understated post, bringing light to a problem that many of us have been grappling with for quite some time. According to their post, “A logging error prevented Search Console from accurately reporting impressions from May 13, 2025, until April 27, 2026. This issue has been resolved.” It was a relief to hear, but also a bit frustrating knowing that impressions, CTR, and average position data were affected for such a significant period. Thankfully, clicks weren’t influenced by this error, which was some consolation.
As I sift through my Search Console data, I must remind myself of this anomaly, particularly when analyzing metrics from that problematic timeframe. The good news is that any data collected from this point forward should be accurate.
Further confirmation came from John Mueller on Bluesky, who reiterated that past data would not be retroactively corrected, but the issue has indeed been resolved going forward.
This development is crucial for all of us who rely heavily on precise data for SEO strategies. If your impressions appear lower and, consequently, your CTR and average position figures seem skewed during this period, this is likely why.
Inspired by this post on Search Engine Land.
As someone who has been on the internet exploration journey for years, today’s news hits home. Ask.com, which many of us fondly remember as Ask Jeeves, officially closed down on May 1, 2026, after a remarkable 29 years of service. It launched on June 3, 1996, even before Google made its debut.
Upon visiting the now-closed Ask.com, we are greeted with a heartfelt farewell message that feels like a trip down memory lane:
Every great search must come to an end. As IAC continues to sharpen its focus, we have made the decision to discontinue our search business, which includes Ask.com. After 25 years of answering the world’s questions, Ask.com officially closed on May 1, 2026.
I can’t help but feel gratitude as they graciously acknowledge, “To the millions who asked…”. They expressed appreciation for the brilliant engineers and loyal users who have been a crucial part of their journey. And yes, Jeeves’ spirit indeed lives on.
For those of us who relied on this answer engine in its early days, Ask.com and the iconic Jeeves butler will always hold a special place. In a world now dominated by AI and competitive answer engines, it’s understandable why IAC, the parent company, decided to step back in such a challenging market.
Ask.com has left a significant impact on the search marketing industry, and saying goodbye is indeed bittersweet. Until we meet again in some digital form, dear Jeeves.
Inspired by this post on Search Engine Land.
When I learned that Google’s Preferred Sources feature now supports all languages, not just English, I was thrilled. This exciting update means more people can tailor their news experience, regardless of the language they speak.
According to a recent post on Google’s blog, ‘Preferred Sources is now rolling out globally in all supported languages.’ This gives me, and everyone else, more control over the news we see on Search, allowing us to choose our preferred outlets to appear more frequently in Top Stories.
It’s fascinating to reflect on how this feature initially rolled out in December, but was limited to English. Now, it’s a comprehensive tool available globally, no matter the language.
Interesting Stats: Google shared some compelling data with this launch. For instance, readers are reportedly twice as likely to click on a site after marking it as a Preferred Source. Also, over 200,000 unique sites have already been selected by users—from local niche blogs to major global news platforms.
Preferred Sources: This feature lets me star my favorite publications in the Top Stories section of Google Search. By doing so, Google uses that interest to show more stories from those sources. I learned it started in beta back in June and was initially available in the U.S. and India by August, but now it’s part of a worldwide expansion.
How it Works: It’s simple! I just click the star icon next to the Top Stories header in my search results. This allows me to pick preferred sources, provided these sites are constantly updating their content.
Once selected, Google promises to showcase more updates from my favorite sites in Top Stories, provided they have fresh content relevant to my search.
For more detailed information, I can visit this page.
Why it Matters: In the competitive area of Google Search traffic, marking my site as a preferred source can make a significant impact. Google indicated these users are twice as likely to engage, which could help in driving more traffic to my site.
So, I’m adding the preferred source icon to encourage my audience to sign up. If you’re interested, you can make Search Engine Land a preferred source by clicking here.
Inspired by this post on Search Engine Land.
Today, I had the pleasure of speaking with the leadership team at TruSkin, the creators of Amazon’s #1 rated Vitamin C serum. In collaboration with First Page Sage, they’ve thrived by teaching consumers that true skincare success comes from dedication and expert advice. Together, we explored how both brands gain consumer trust by emphasizing that the best outcomes are cumulative, not immediate.
First Page Sage: Your Vitamin C serum tops the charts on Amazon. How do you ensure customer fidelity for a product with gradual results?
TruSkin: Openness and education are crucial. Effective skincare is a commitment over weeks, not overnight. While our serum offers immediate brightening, the deeper effects like smoother skin take time. We provide upfront guidance through educational content, detailing how vitamin C functions, setting realistic timelines, and promoting our gentle, science-backed formulations for sustainable results. Just like First Page Sage, we thrive on honesty about the process, using SEO strategies that rely on consistent, strategic efforts rather than quick fixes.
First Page Sage: What tactics do you employ to keep customers committed to achieving more profound results?
TruSkin: We emphasize ingredient transparency, dermatologist verification, and social proof. Customers can see exactly what’s in our products and why it matters for their skin. Our third-party testing adds credibility, and with over 150,000 reviews, our product’s effectiveness is well supported. Furthermore, subscription models encourage users to remain steadfast in their routines to fully unlock the benefits. This approach mirrors how First Page Sage uses transparency, case studies, and tracking, allowing organic visibility and results to flourish over time.
First Page Sage: What common misconceptions do consumers have about vitamin C serums and anti-aging products?
TruSkin: Many believe higher vitamin C percentages assure better results, which is not true. The focus should be on stability, pH balance, and skin compatibility. Our Sodium Ascorbyl Phosphate formula provides stability and less irritation than standard L-Ascorbic Acid, allowing consistent use without discomfort. It’s consistency that brings results, not just potency. Similarly, First Page Sage finds that strategic, high-quality SEO outperforms mere content volume or keyword stuffing.
First Page Sage: In an industry full of promises for instant results, how do you differentiate while promoting patience?
TruSkin: Quick fixes usually involve harsh chemicals damaging the skin over time. Our focus is on long-term skin health through pH-balanced and skin-compatible formulas. We educate our audience about the superiority of our SAP vitamin C form and avoid misleading ‘percentage races,’ favoring nourishing and clinically effective ingredients that deliver real results. This resonates particularly with Millennials and Gen Xers who value wellness and sustainable results over quick fixes.
First Page Sage: What advice would you give to brands selling products or services that require time to see results?
TruSkin: Establish credibility and maintain transparent communication throughout the customer’s journey. Utilize third-party endorsements, and provide educational content to explain the importance of the process, celebrating milestones along the way. For skincare, this could mean showcasing early improvements like increased glow or hydration. Above all, be truthful. Reliable brands don’t overpromise but ensure consistent, science-backed outcomes with clear communication.
Inspired by this post on First Page Sage Blog.
I recently sat down with Anuj Srivastava to explore the synergy between engineering and marketing when launching a new franchise.
At First Page Sage, I’ve witnessed countless companies pour millions into fleeting algorithm tricks, only to see them crumble overnight. Genuine authority— the type that withstands every Google update and earns citations from ChatGPT—requires true engineering, not quick hacks.
This belief led me to Scott Hietpas, CEO of Computype, a leader in creating the most resilient labels that adhere to any surface and thrive in any environment. While my team focuses on digital permanence, Scott’s team excels in physical identification systems. We’re both tackling the same challenge: ensuring vital information endures when other solutions fall short.
Scott and his company label blood products across North America’s blood supply chain, and odds are, your car tires are marked with their labels too. Their products can withstand temperatures ranging from -196°C to 204°C. If you’re curious why ‘built to last’ isn’t just a slogan but a powerful competitive advantage, read on.
First Page Sage: Many firms promise durability. Why do cheap labels fail, and what are the hidden costs?
Scott Hietpas: Cheap labels fail because they’re not crafted to endure harsh conditions. Adhesives might not suit cold storage, substrates may crack under high heat, and barcodes can fade and become unreadable. A lab might save a cent per label and feel smart, but then spend $200,000 re-labeling specimens after cold storage failures. Similarly, a pharmaceutical company might lose FDA compliance when commodity labels render codes unreadable, halting production. We engineer labels that adhere to any surface—be it glass, silicone, or textured metals—and perform in diverse environments. The price for failing is always catastrophic. Paying a little more for durability is a small price compared to the colossal cost of failure. We assist our clients in assessing their total expenses and minimizing risks.
First Page Sage: What does it take to engineer for extreme temperatures from -196°C to 204°C?
Hietpas: It involves material science that most labeling companies find too intricate. Cryogenic tasks like biobanking need adhesives that don’t crystallize and substrates that don’t shatter when frozen. High-heat needs in tire manufacturing demand polyimide films that retain integrity under thermal stress. Blood services choose our labels for freeze-thaw cycles and international cold-chain transport. Tire producers rely on us for labels that survive vulcanization at 400°F and stay readable throughout the tire’s lifetime. Standard labels fail under these conditions, and our capability to withstand them is why we confidently say our labels perform universally.
First Page Sage: You dominate the global tire bead and healthcare label market. How did Computype become the go-to for critical industries?
Hietpas: It’s our zero tolerance for failure. If a tire maker’s ID system collapses, defect rates spike and costs soar. If blood labels fail, blood shortages and steep replacement expenses follow. These sectors can’t accept ‘just okay’ solutions. Our labels are engineered for permanence, earning trust through undeniable, long-term performance. Millions of our tire and blood bag labels are scanned during production to ensure functionality before leaving our facility. While competitors sell labels, we offer solutions that outlive the products they identify, solving critical problems.
First Page Sage: How does “stick to any surface” work when dealing with challenging surfaces?
Hietpas: Our labels are tailored for specific uses. Medical silicone needs different bonding agents compared to powder-coated steel. Curved glass requires different flow traits than textured surfaces. Instead of universal adhesives, we create custom solutions for demanding surfaces that don’t respond to generic labels. Our engineering understands adhesive-substrate interactions, optimizing for permanent bonding even under stress. When we claim our labels stick to any surface, it’s because we’ve addressed adhesion issues for difficult materials. Our expertise means we offer ready-to-use or customizable solutions that quickly meet our clients’ challenges.
First Page Sage: How do durable labeling and lasting digital authority align?
Hietpas: Both demand thorough knowledge and application understanding. Inexpensive labels may save costs now but lead to eventual disasters. Similarly, black-hat SEO might provide short-lived success but ultimately ruins your rankings. True durability, both physical and digital, entails designing systems for worst-case scenarios—environmental extremes for us, algorithmic turmoil for you. Companies eyeing short savings or growth hacks often lose to those engineering for durability. For over 50 years, our labels have outlasted the competition. Likewise, First Page Sage excels because your authority strategies outlast algorithm changes. Build lasting solutions, or continually rebuild.
Labels that triumph when all else fails. Explore Computype.com for systems designed for extremes—since in critical applications, there’s no second place.
Inspired by this post on First Page Sage Blog.
Recently, I noticed a significant change in Google’s approach to handling spam reports. They’ve updated their stance on whether they’ll process reports containing personally identifying information, and it feels like a big shift from what was communicated just a week prior.
On their updated spam report page, Google now clearly states that any spam report containing personally identifying information will not be processed. This revision comes after their previous announcement that such information could be passed on to the site in question.
Here’s What’s Changed: Google has added a highlighted note on their official spam report page, emphasizing two points:
(1) Avoid including personally identifying information in your spam reports.
(2) If you do include such information, your submission won’t be processed.
Google’s explanation reads:
“Don’t include any personally identifying information in your submission. To comply with regulations, we must send the submission text to the site owner to help them understand the context of a manual action, if one is issued. Because of this, we won’t process your submission if we determine it contains personally identifying information to protect privacy. Not including such information fully ensures your information is safe and prevents your submission from being discarded.”
Previously: Just a week ago, as we documented, Google allowed:
This policy raised many eyebrows across the industry. Concerns were not just about being flagged for identifying competitors or spammers, but there were also legal implications. It seems Google is now aligning with regulations to avoid sharing personally identifying data.
Why You Should Care: If you’re aiming to submit a spam report to Google, make sure it doesn’t contain any personally identifying information. Should you inadvertently include such information, rest assured that it won’t reach the reported site and the report simply won’t be processed. You can always resubmit your report without these details.
Inspired by this post on Search Engine Land.
When I think about brand visibility today, it’s clear that being chosen by AI systems is crucial. Authority, unique insights, and consistent signals now determine if my brand makes the cut.
I’ve realized that AI isn’t just reshaping search; it’s deciding which brands are seen and which are ignored.
I learned from Andrew Warden, CMO of Semrush, at the Adobe Summit that visibility is evolving fundamentally, and our brands risk being systematically filtered out by AI systems.
“The idea of standing out is no longer optional. There’s a real risk of sameness,” he pointed out.
With AI systems deciding what to highlight and what to ignore, I know I must compete more fiercely for visibility in AI-generated answers.
The change is evident in the data: 60% of Google searches now end without a click to a website. People are still seeking information but aren’t always visiting websites. They’re getting their answers directly from AI systems like Google AI Overviews and ChatGPT.
These AI systems have become, as Warden described, the “new gatekeepers.”
This shift ushers us into the agentic era, where AI systems act as intermediaries, guiding users from inquiry to decision in one seamless interface.
Meanwhile, user behavior is evolving. People engage more in conversational environments, posing follow-up questions, refining queries, and surveying options within the interface, all resulting in fewer clicks but often attracting higher-intent users.
Warden noted that consumers using LLMs convert at least four times higher than those relying solely on search.
Despite some claims that AI could replace search, Warden reassured us that SEO is not dead.
SEO has become more foundational than ever. It’s essential to ensure my brand exists in the data layer AI systems rely on.
Warden emphasized, “SEO isn’t just for humans anymore. This is a training manual for AI right now.”
This involves ensuring:
Without these, my brand won’t appear at all.
Research backs this up: 94% of Google AI Overviews cite at least one top organic result, reaffirming that traditional search signals still support AI outcomes.
One striking concept from the session was what Warden dubbed the “bland tax.”
AI conditions itself to overlook blandness, causing generic or repetitive content to vanish.
If I’m generic, Warden warned I’m perceived as average, and if I’m bland, I’m effectively invisible.
AI systems don’t reward sameness. Rather than highlighting my brand, they often condense similar content into a single, attribution-lacking response.
“This is an invisible penalty,” Warden noted.
The consequences manifest in several ways:
“You also become a free training ground for LLMs,” he said.
Warden redefined brand visibility as a blend of:
“You absolutely need both,” Warden asserted.
SEO ensures I’m discoverable. Authority determines whether my brand shows up in AI-generated responses.
Without authority, I risk turning into a “commodity that isn’t worth being mentioned.”
Warden outlined three crucial areas determining whether my brand appears or gets filtered out:
AI systems map entities and relationships, and they must recognize my brand as an authority on a topic.
One key signal is brand demand. If people aren’t seeking out my brand, neither will AI.
Strong brands emphasize their authority across various platforms—owned content, media exposure, and community discussions—demonstrating their niche.
AI systems prioritize content that offers new insights. It’s vital to not just publish content but contribute something meaningful.
They emphasize new facts with proprietary data, original research, unique perspectives, and expert insights.
According to Warden, original insights can enhance visibility by 30 to 40%.
AI evaluates not just what I convey but also what others say about my brand.
This includes reviews, discussions on platforms like Reddit and YouTube, media mentions, and customer conversations.
Warden warned that conflicting signals could prompt AI to flag my brand as unreliable.
Consistency across these channels creates what he called a “consensus signal” that AI systems can trust.
One of our biggest challenges is organizational, as visibility isn’t just a channel issue; it’s an organizational one.
Currently, responsibilities are fragmented. SEO teams focus solely on rankings, PR and brand teams manage messaging, and growth teams conduct experiments. This leaves no one clearly owning AI visibility.
This fragmentation leads to inconsistent signals and missed opportunities for us.
To truly compete, we need alignment across teams, working on a shared strategy about how my brand appears wherever LLMs gather data.
Meanwhile, traditional performance metrics are unraveling.
Many marketers, including myself, notice a gap where rankings hold steady, but traffic declines. Meanwhile, leads might increase, yet attribution remains murky.
Warden explained that demand remains, but traffic no longer serves as its proxy. Our content is utilized, but not in ways directing users back to us.
This creates a growing disparity between impact and the ability to measure that impact accurately.
The nature of competition has evolved. I’m no longer vying for a mere position; instead, I’m competing to be featured in a synthesized AI answer.
Authority, once easier to influence, now hinges on external validation—emphasizing what others say over what I publish.
Algorithms have shifted from being my allies to arbiters of meaning, marking a significant change in search dynamics since Google itself emerged.
AI has not altered what makes a brand strong but has transformed how that strength is measured and rewarded. The brands that win today will build real authority in a focused niche, publish original and high-value content, and ensure consistent messaging across every platform.
The need for consistent third-party validation across an ecosystem is paramount.
As Warden urged, I must make it impossible for LLMs to ignore my brand.
Inspired by this post on Search Engine Land.