Google Faces EU Scrutiny Over Parasite SEO Crackdown—Is Search Quality at Risk?

Google has publicly defended its enforcement of site reputation abuse policies after the European Commission announced an investigation into whether the company unfairly demotes news publishers in search results. The company called the probe “misguided” and warned it could harm millions of European users. Pandu Nayak, Google’s Chief Scientist for Search, wrote the response.

Background and what triggered this

The European Commission opened an inquiry under the Digital Markets Act to see if Google’s anti-spam rules are unfair to legitimate publisher revenue models. Publishers have complained that Google is demoting sites that run sponsored content or host third-party promotional material. EU antitrust officials say they’re worried those policies might not treat news publishers in a “fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory” way.

What is parasite SEO and why Google acted

Google updated its site reputation abuse policy last year to fight parasite SEO. That term describes people who pay publishers to host content on established domains solely to manipulate search rankings. Examples are stark and highly problematic: payday loan reviews on educational sites, casino pages on medical sites, or third-party coupon pages shoehorned into news sites. Google even pointed to weight-loss pill spam and payday loan promotions as examples.

After the policy change, manual enforcement started. Big names felt the impact: Forbes, The Wall Street Journal, Time and CNN received penalties in November 2024. Google later clarified that having first-party oversight over third-party material doesn’t automatically exempt content that’s primarily designed to exploit ranking signals.

Three lines of defense from Google

Google’s public reply leaned on three points. First, it noted a German court had rejected a similar claim, saying the anti-spam policy was “valid, reasonable, and applied consistently.” Second, Google argues the rules protect users from scams and low-quality content. The company warns that allowing pay-to-play ranking manipulation would let bad actors push out sites that don’t use those spammy tactics. Third, Google says smaller creators support the crackdown, claiming the policy “helps level the playing field” so quality content can compete fairly.

Nayak also argued that the Digital Markets Act is already making Search “less helpful for European businesses and users,” and that this new probe risks rewarding bad actors rather than protecting users. Importantly, Google says it has relied on manual enforcement so far — human evaluators reviewing cases — and hasn’t launched algorithmic actions for site reputation abuse. The company added site reputation abuse to its Search Quality Rater Guidelines in January 2025, defining it as content published on host sites “mainly because of that host site’s already-established ranking signals.”

Why this matters — an awkward middle ground

This investigation exposes a real tension. On one hand, Google claims parasite SEO degrades search quality no matter who profits. On the other, publishers insist that sponsored content with genuine editorial oversight is a legitimate revenue source, especially when newsrooms are under pressure. So where’s the line between manipulative placement and legitimate partnerships? It’s not a tiny distinction. If Google’s policy sweeps up bona fide publisher-advertiser relationships, it could limit how news organizations make money. If it’s narrowly targeted at manipulative tactics, it protects the integrity of search.

Regulators see potential discrimination

The EU’s stance suggests regulators worry that Google might be applying its rules in a discriminatory way. The Digital Markets Act forbids gatekeepers from unfairly penalizing others, and the penalties can be steep — up to 10% of global revenue for violations. Google has tried to ease fears: last December it said properly marked affiliate content isn’t affected and that publishers can submit reconsideration requests through Search Console to remove penalties. The updated policy notes that merely hosting third-party content isn’t a violation unless the content is explicitly published to exploit a site’s rankings.

What’s next

The European Commission has formally opened a DMA investigation and will gather evidence and decide which DMA provisions to examine. Google will receive statements of objections and can respond with its arguments. DMA probes move faster than traditional antitrust cases, so the process could be swift. Publishers might submit evidence of traffic drops or revenue loss to support their claims.

This could force changes in how Google enforces spam policies in Europe, or it could validate Google’s current approach. Either way, the debate raises a broader question: how do we balance protecting users from scams while preserving viable business models for publishers? It’s a knotty problem, and neither side looks entirely comfortable.

What do you think? Share your take in the comments and follow us on Facebook, X (Twitter), or LinkedIn for updates and analysis.

Are you really turning clicks into sales? If you’re in doubt, learn how here.

Sources:

• www.blog.google/inside-google/company-announcements/defending-search-users-from-parasite-seo-spam/
• www.apnews.com/article/google-european-commission-investigation-548209cd3266713769df6ac991113cbf
• www.searchenginejournal.com/google-defends-parasite-seo-crackdown-as-eu-opens-investigation/560822/