Google Rolls Back Spam Policy in Europe Following EU Pressure
The search giant has revised enforcement of its site-reputation abuse policy across Europe after regulators raised concerns that publishers were being unfairly penalized.
Google has rolled back part of its spam-policy enforcement in Europe following pressure from European Union regulators. The change affects Google’s site-reputation abuse policy, which was designed to prevent websites from hosting third-party content primarily to manipulate search rankings. Critics, however, argued that the policy was unfairly affecting publishers and media organizations.
Under the revised approach, Google will no longer apply manual demotions under this policy to search results shown within the European Economic Area (EEA). Instead, affected sections of websites may be treated separately from the main domain and ranked independently based on their own content and signals. The change applies across the EU’s 27 member states as well as Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein.
The decision followed concerns raised under the European Union’s Digital Markets Act, which is designed to limit anti-competitive practices by major technology companies. European regulators had examined complaints that Google’s enforcement of the policy could unfairly reduce the visibility of news publishers and other websites that hosted commercial partner content.
Google’s broader spam rules remain in place globally. The company continues to prohibit practices such as deceptive content, keyword stuffing, scaled low-value content and attempts to manipulate search rankings. The policy adjustment specifically changes how manual actions related to site-reputation abuse affect search results inside the EEA. Outside Europe, the existing enforcement approach remains unchanged.
The move demonstrates the growing influence of European technology regulation on how major internet platforms operate. While Google has presented the change as a way to ensure fairer ranking treatment, regulators will continue monitoring its implementation. The development could also become an important precedent for future disputes over search rankings, publisher visibility and the power of major technology companies.
