The landscape of search engine optimisation (SEO) has always been a bit like the Wild West. Rules change overnight, fortunes are made or lost on an algorithm update, and businesses scramble to adapt. But the winds are shifting.
This morning, the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) held a significant roundtable discussion aimed at bringing Google’s organic search under some form of regulatory control.
For years, the integrity of Google’s organic results – and now its AI overviews – has been treated as an ethical issue. We have seen moral debates, massive industry rows, and the famous (now retired) mantra of “Don’t be evil.” However, we are now looking at a future where Google could have actual legal responsibilities to users and businesses.
This changes the game. Here is our take on what was discussed and why it matters to your business.
From Ethical Codes to Legal Obligations
Until now, if your traffic dropped overnight, you had nowhere to go but forums to complain. There was no regulator to appeal to, only a “black box” algorithm. The CMA is looking to change that dynamic.
The shift here is profound. We are moving from a self-regulated environment where Google marks its own homework to one where they may face legal consequences for failing to meet specific standards.
The roundtable threw up some fascinating and challenging, talking points that get to the heart of how the internet functions today.
1. Are Organic Results Still Relevant?
This is the multi-billion pound question. The consensus seems to be split. For content publishers, organic search remains the lifeblood of their business model.
However, for ecommerce sites – many of whom are our clients – the reality is different. Ecommerce has largely been forcibly switched over to paid results and specialised search features (like Google Shopping). While this particular regulatory process doesn’t cover those paid elements, the distinction is vital. If organic slots are pushed further down by AI and ads, does regulating them actually help online retailers?
2. The AI Conundrum
With the rollout of AI Overviews (formerly SGE), the line between a “search result” and “generated content” is blurring. One of the biggest headaches discussed was how to make conduct requirements apply to AI content. If an AI hallucinates or creates a biased answer, is that a ranking failure or a content creation failure? Regulators have their work cut out for them here.
3. Transparency vs. The Spammers
Google has historically been secretive about its ranking factors to stop bad actors from gaming the system. The roundtable addressed this tension: how can Google be more transparent to legitimate businesses without playing into the hands of spammers? It is a delicate balance. Too much transparency, and search quality could plummet; too little, and businesses can’t invest with confidence.
Google’s Proposed Obligations
So, what would this “regulatory control” actually look like? Several proposed obligations were tabled, designed to level the playing field:
- Reporting Mechanisms: Google would need a formal process to report complaints directly to the CMA.
- No Self-Preferencing: A ban on Google favouring its own services over competitors in organic results.
- Notice Periods: Giving publishers a 30-day notice of material policy changes. This would be a massive win for stability, allowing businesses to prepare rather than react.
- Ranking Neutrality: A requirement not to take commercial or contractual agreements into account when ranking sites (neither boosting partners nor penalising non-partners).
It is worth noting on that last point: the CMA correctly pointed out that there is no real evidence Google currently boosts or penalises based on ad spend, despite what you might read on angry forums. However, the perception that they might is damaging enough.
The Trust Deficit
This brings us to the core of the CMA’s argument: Trust.
The CMA believes that a lack of trust in the system is holding back sustainable business investment. If a Director or Business Owner cannot predict whether their primary revenue channel will exist in six months, they are less likely to invest in growth, content, or technical innovation.
By ensuring organic results are relevant and the playing field is legally fair, the goal is to create an environment where businesses can invest with confidence, knowing the goalposts won’t move without warning.
What This Means for Your Business Strategy
At Hot Dog Solutions, we thrive on navigating complexity for our clients. Whether you are a start-up or a corporate giant, these potential regulations signal a move towards stability.
If these proposals become law, we could see a more predictable SEO landscape. The 30-day notice period alone would allow us to adjust strategies proactively rather than reactively.
However, regulation moves slowly, and technology moves fast. While the CMA deliberates, AI is already reshaping how users search. The smartest play isn’t to wait for the regulators to save the day, but to build a robust, diversified strategy that works regardless of the rules.
We don’t just watch these developments; we bake them into our strategic planning. We ensure our clients aren’t just surviving the algorithm, but mastering it.
If you are concerned about how future search changes might impact your bottom line, or if you are tired of agencies that don’t understand the technical landscape, let’s talk. We act as an extension of your team, helping you navigate the noise and focus on what generates revenue.
