I thought the prior Google Gemini answer was decent, so tried my luck with a bit harder of a question: Historically successful online publishing enterprises like IAC (rebranded as People Inc) have struggled in recent years as the big web players like Google, Facebook, and Amazon ate most of the ad pie. What types of publishing are likely to be profitable in years to come with the rise of AI rewrites & AI representations of content by the core traffic channels?

With the rise of generative AI rewrites and direct search-channel representations of content, traditional publishing models built on basic information curation, content arbitrage, and generic search engine optimization (SEO) are facing structural obsolescence.

By analyzing the strict criteria Google’s 2025 Search Quality Rater Guidelines use to evaluate content, we can identify which publishing models are heavily penalized and, conversely, which publishing models are structurally positioned to remain profitable.

The guidelines reveal four specific publishing archetypes that are highly resistant to AI displacement and designed to earn premium ratings:

1. Primary-Source Journalism & "Revealed" Information

Under the guidelines, standard summaries or aggregations of news are explicitly penalized. Raters are instructed that content has low originality if it simply summarizes the perspectives of others, or summarizes a specific news article or forum discussion without adding any independent value.

• The Profitable Model: Investigative, primary-source publishing. The guidelines define very high-quality news content as original reporting that provides information that would not otherwise have been known had the article not revealed it.


• Why It Wins: AI models cannot rewrite or represent information that has not yet been published. Outlets that invest the high degree of time, skill, and effort required to uncover new data, conduct interviews, or release proprietary investigative findings hold the raw material that core traffic channels must reference.

2. First-Hand "Experience" & Creator-Led Ecosystems

The integration of Experience into the E-E-A-T framework signals a major structural shift. The guidelines make a clear distinction between unoriginal content and unique personal perspectives.

• The Profitable Model: Narrative, firsthand life experience publishing. High originality is defined as content unique to the creator, such as personal perspectives based on firsthand, real-world life experience.


• Why It Wins: An AI summary of travel destinations or product reviews is categorized as "low originality." However, a travel publisher employing writers to share their raw, lived struggles, or a community forum where multiple real users actively discuss a niche topic, represents massive total human effort. Traffic channels actively prioritize these community forums, Q&As, and social platforms because they provide authentic human experiences that automated systems cannot replicate.

3. Deep-Niche, High-Talent Curation & Cased Knowledge

Publishers that produce superficial, generic "how-to" articles or basic "best-of" lists are heavily downgraded. Content that only contains commonly known facts, features poor writing, or provides generic advice on a topic without actual expertise receives a Low rating.

• The Profitable Model: Expert, high-talent niche publishing. Highly rated informational content must showcase a high level of talent, skill, and accuracy, particularly in Your Money or Your Life (YMYL) areas.


• Why It Wins: If a publisher uses AI tools, they must show a high level of human curation, editing, and added value to avoid being flagged as Lowest quality. Publishers who employ true subject-matter experts to write highly complex, professionally presented papers, or highly skilled professionals who produce unique step-by-step videos, continue to achieve the highest trust scores.

4. Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) Utilities & Closed Platforms

In early web guidelines, basic directory tools and simple aggregators could rank highly. Today, generic templated pages created automatically using RSS feeds or APIs with no curation or added value are rated Lowest as Scaled Content Abuse.

• The Profitable Model: Interactive storefronts, proprietary database utilities, and secure transactional portals.


• Why It Wins: Legitimate interactive shopping engines, local business guides, and true merchants are recognized by raters as valuable utilities. Because they require massive human design, proprietary software engineering, and secure checkout systems, they represent direct, non-scraped utility that search channels cannot easily "summarize" without breaking the transactional user flow.

The Death of "Authority Rental" (The Strategic Warning)

Historically, large media conglomerates (like IAC/Dotdash Meredith) offset declining ad revenues by acquiring authoritative legacy domains and "renting" their domain authority to third-party commercial content, such as white-label coupon directories or sponsored reviews.

The latest guidelines have completely neutralized this strategy under Site Reputation Abuse policies. Under these modern rules:

• A movie review site hosting advice on "how to buy social media followers" or a news site hosting a white-label coupon service purely to monetize search signals must be rated Lowest.


• Legacy domains can no longer use their historic brand equity to shield low-effort, outsourced commercial content.

The Takeaway: To survive, modern publishing enterprises must pivot away from "search traffic monetization" as their primary product. Instead, they must treat original investigative data, firsthand human experience, and niche expert talent as their core, non-replicable assets.

----

After creating the above Google Gemini offered to create an executive summary publishing strategy brief.

As a thought experiment, I uploaded all the ancient copies of the Google remote rater guidelines I could find to Google's Notebook ML, then asked it a series of SEO-related questions.

The future-related query was: given the trends discussed in these documents, what are the next major shifts that are likely to come into focus?

Analyzing the historical trajectory of the search rater guidelines through late 2025 reveals several major trajectory lines. By looking at what the guidelines have actively introduced, refined, and updated in their latest editions, we can project the next major shifts that are coming into focus:

1. Assessing Generative AI and "Value-Add" over Automated Summarization

The guidelines have recently begun addressing content created, reworded, or paraphrased by generative AI tools.

• The Trajectory: In early iterations, raters evaluated whether content was copied or plagiarized. In 2025, the guidelines specifically instruct raters to watch for low-effort content that merely summarizes a specific page (such as a news article or forum discussion) without any added value, or content that contains telltale markers of automated generation (such as "As an AI language model").


• The Next Shift: Search evaluation will likely move from simply checking if a page contains "accurate" text to deeply evaluating originality, talent, and effort. Simply republishing or minorly restructuring facts via AI will likely be treated as "typical" or "average" at best, with premium ratings reserved only for content with distinct, human-driven synthesis.

2. Broadening YMYL from Individual to Societal-Scale Harm

Historically, Your Money or Your Life (YMYL) definitions focused primarily on individual consequences—medical advice that could physically harm the reader, or financial advice that could deplete a family savings account.

• The Trajectory: The latest guidelines explicitly state that YMYL topics can harm groups of people or society as a whole, not just the individual viewing the content. Raters are now instructed to analyze societal impact, specifically citing factors like trust in public institutions, local elections, and ongoing violence. Additionally, YMYL definitions were updated as recently as September 2025 to continuously refine these boundaries.


• The Next Shift: Raters will increasingly be tasked with evaluating information integrity during civic events and crises. Evaluation will demand rigorous standards for content that could cause systemic damage to public safety, public health, or democratic processes.

3. Evaluating Multi-Perspective Diversity for Open Queries

The guidelines emphasize that when a query has no single "right answer" or is subjective in nature, search engines should not deliver a single consensus link.

• The Trajectory: In the 2023–2025 period, Google restructured its Needs Met guidelines to specify that high-performing search results must represent a diverse set of perspectives from a variety of websites, content types, and people.


• The Next Shift: Rather than rating individual pages in isolation, evaluation is shifting toward rating the diversity of the collective search engine response. Raters will likely need to evaluate whether search results provide a balanced, representative spectrum of real human experience and viewpoints rather than an algorithmic echo chamber.

4. Direct Action Against Reputation Exploitation (Parasite SEO)

The newest 2025 updates directly align the Low and Lowest Page Quality sections with official Google Search Web Spam Policies.

• The Trajectory: The guidelines highlight highly sophisticated, non-traditional spam methods, such as an established newspaper or first-party site hosting coupons from a "white-label service" purely to capitalize on the news site's reputation, or an established site branching into unrelated topics using freelance content simply to rank better.


• The Next Shift: Human evaluation is shifting to combat Reputation Abuse (often called Parasite SEO). Raters are being trained to identify and penalize instances where trusted, authoritative domains act as "hosts" for low-quality, commercial third-party content that has no logical relationship to the site's primary purpose.

5. Seamless Evaluation of Dynamic and Interactive Platforms

Search has shifted from a text-and-links paradigm to a universe of highly interactive, video-centric, and community-driven spaces.

• The Trajectory: Recent updates modernized rating guidelines to apply seamlessly to social platforms, forums, Q&A pages, and modern content creator models. Examples were updated to include popular short-form video platforms (like TikTok). Raters are also instructed on how to handle "dynamic content" copied from changing feeds.


• The Next Shift: Search quality rating is moving toward creator-first and community-first frameworks. Raters will increasingly evaluate not just static articles, but the health, reliability, and helpfulness of real-time community threads, social media profiles, and short-form video content creators.

----

Just by uploading a series of documents to Google Gemini's Notebook product and querying it a variety of times you can sound like more of a thought leader than most people in a particular industry, particularly if the industry is dominated by a singular monopolistic player which has published historical content you can sort through and query for shifts across time.

If you limit the database which is searched through only to official documents you will be analyzing a standard voice from a single entity, which limits the opportunity to hallucinate and find false patterns, though there will still be some gaps that can be closed by paying attention to political headlines in the industry. Google gave an advanced warning they would start treat parasite hosted content on major publisher sites similarly to how they treat a typical affiliate site (though with white gloves, since they would isolate the areas impacted versus do a sitewide torch job) that led to some politically connected publishers seeking relief from governments, which they got in the UK.

Have you ever got arrested because a sadistic & malevolent psychopath tied in with organized crime has stolen millions from your family, hacked your wife's computers, was torturing your spouse, claimed to be your secret sidepiece whore lover, and was claiming that you personally were the culprit for all the dysfunction?

I have enjoyed one of those types of arrests - or, two actually - thusfar. ;)

The swatting, cyberstalking, hacking, death threats, etc. ... was done with the best of intentions by sadistic & malevolent psychopath Stella Huh ... she wanted to keep the millions she stole & aimed to drive a high-conflict divorce preventing my wife and I from working together to ensure Stella's crimes backfire and it is her own life which gets destroyed.

The vile psychopath who sponsored MANY swatting attempts against my family is named Stella Huh. Or at least that is one of her names. Her birth name was actually Sung Ha. She also has many aliases. One of them she shared was Saskya Bedoya, and she also claimed to use Serena Badgely.

Her rotating name of the day does not actually matter. What matters is that she hurt my daughter, and Stella/they/them/it belongs in prison. I need your help to make that happen. The background story is crazy.

My arrest video shows me explaining MANY of Stella Huh's crimes to the Bellevue, Washington police. The police then did a bang up job on their police report, where they falsely attributed Stella Huh's hacking & surveillance crimes to me.

That led to a 5-year no contact order, as the judge did not see the bodycam footage where it was explained someone else (Stella Huh) was the criminal conducting those crimes. Nyjat Rose-Akins was the judge who gave me the longest possible no-contact-order after reading the surveillance and hacking mentioned in that police report. On her site she describes her approach like this:

“Nyjat's approach to decision-making from the bench is to listen first, decide last, and never let ego interfere with fulfilling her judicial responsibilities. She believes in individualized justice and approaches every case with deep respect for the weight of judicial decision-making — treating every person who comes before the court with dignity and respect.”

She may listen first for some, but she gave me no chance to speak on my behalf before giving me a 5 year order based on the crimes of a third party.

Then as Stella Huh deleted emails from my daughter's school, threatened to murder my wife, threatened to murder my daughter, scared my wife into calling in a bomb threat for getting a birthday gift ... I got additional legal violations for trying to protect my family from sadistic and malevolent psychopath Stella Huh.

The police made no mention of Stella Huh in spite of me giving what amounts to a sermon against they/them/it. And since their police report was absolute dogshit and the judge did not speak to me, the judge may as well try to destroy my life and family to make herself a proud accomplice of organized crime.

The crimes have been going on since at least 2016, with additional attacks in 2017, 2020 and then A WHOLE LOT of attacks happening after the SEC created the Barton Receivership in late 2022.

Stella Huh demanded to see my wife and daughter in person, where she then nearly broke my daughter's neck on January 2, 2023. That meeting also had Stella Huh plant malware on my wife's Apple devices.

Since then we had paid witnesses, bribed judges, at least a dozen different swatting attempts, death threats over hacked AI, death threats over hacked Viber, burglary, international wire fraud, property damage, etc.

Many of the crimes were not reported because the police are so inept you feel it is pointless. Some of them were only to have retard police officers try to flip them around. For example, the time I called 9-1-1 on a death threat against my daughter the low IQ police officer Pierce in Bellevue, Washington told me he did not care who had hurt my daughter, that death threats over AI do not count, and then he wanted to send me to jail for calling in a death threat.

That is how fucking stupid Bellevue, Washington police are.

Stella already confessed to bribing a corrupt judge in the Philippines in 2024. Confessions do not matter so long as nobody listens.

Imagine going to the local police office and reporting them extortion campaigns with computer hacking and threats to drain bank accounts and the police alternate between telling you threats are not crime and you can not prove who the person who made them was, even if they made them on a phone call to you!

We have some seriously stupid cops in the United States. So many years of the DEI stuff has driven away the actual talent while the people who do not give a crap about outcomes but just want a job are free to do as they please, even if it does not deliver justice.

Today in Lisbon we get the court results for the time Stella Huh sponsored a swatting campaign against my wife. Stella bribed a fraudulent witness named Anabela Felgueira Ferreira, who claimed on June 4, 2024 that my daughter fell and there was some sort of potential domestic violence incident. Over a quarter year later, the bribed false witness Anabela Felgueira Ferreira changed her statement on September 12, 2024 to claim that my wife had repeatedly pulled our daughter by the hair and thrown her to the ground. Today we get to see if that particular bribery campaign by Stella Huh only reached the false witness, or if it also applied to the judge.

As a bonus from that swatting campaign, a physically abusive police officer from Lisbon named Nuno Filipe Lourenço Ferreira lifted my wife off the ground by her arms, causing her shoulder to pop out of socket 3 separate times in the past couple years, requiring resets in 3 different hospitals. I reported the shoulder issues and sponsored domestic violence swatting against my wife to the geniuses in Bellevue police. Bellevue police did not bother including that information in their stellar police report. They did tell me that my wife did not want me punished and she was just venting after Officer Poeschl did his illegal search and seizure in our home.

Only the fake crimes count in this world though, so the fourth amendment to the constitution, that is simply invalid in Bellevue so long as cops like Officer Poeschl are on the force & can paint a semi-valid sounding narrative for their personal criminal acts after the fact. They'll sit on the bodycam video footage showcasing their crimes literally for years as they drip it out while your life and family fall apart because Officer Poeschl is a steaming pile of shit who routinely violates the United States Constitution to manufacture fake crimes.

Meanwhile racketeering criminals tied to the Stella Huh crime ring keep layering on more computer hacking, more wire fraud, more sponsored swatting by low-IQ police officers who are "just doing their jobs." Timothy Barton's civil case has already went all the way to the Supreme Court, with the lawyers representing Timothy Barton recently advising 9-figure asset-backed-securities built around Bitcoin loans. Hunton Andrews Kurth helped advise a Ledn deal. And according to Stella Huh infused hacked Google Gemini they are also my lawyer. It is not true of course, but anything to drive rage and division is a win so long as cops have IQs bordering on retarded, are lazy, or are bribed to act as accessories to crime.

Nothing makes sense other than to have really low expectations of government workers & expect them to do what is easy rather than what is right.

The nanny state and overzealous policework means swatting campaigns are becoming more widespread.

The western world is quickly becoming a series of highly uncivilized society gutted by anarcho-tyrany.

Anarcho-tyranny, a system where the government fails to enforce fundamental laws and protect citizens from real crime (anarchy), while simultaneously over-regulating, taxing, and prosecuting law-abiding citizens for minor infractions or ideological thought crimes (tyranny).— Bryan (@AB75HM) June 27, 2026

Crazy people can just roll up and randomly shoot people for the lulz, getting a not-guilty-by-insanity outcome. Meanwhile people who say they were not harmed by people who literally did not harm them in the least get a mandatory family destruction by court order because abusive shitbag police officers like Officer Poeschl:

• violate the fourth amendment via invalid exigent circumstances to commit illegal search and seizure


• validate his own personal mens rea in the fraudulent exigent circumstances by claiming to have "overheard" a statement while conducting his illegal search and seizure


• is directly & calmly informed of about a dozen different state & federal crimes committed by Stella Huih's racketeering crime organization (including those tied to the events of the day)


• decides to include some of Stella Huh's crimes in his police report


• wrongly attributes Stella Huh's criminal conduct to Aaron Wall

I hope Officer Poeschl reads this blog post. I hope he sees himself referenced as a steaming pile of shit & a criminal. And I hope he is objective enough to realize those statements are facts rather than opinions. The fucking pile of shit police officer deserves to be fired and caged for his crimes and fraud, with him personally liable for lost wages tied to his horrific police report and ilegal forced entry into the home.

Until then I need to work with someone who is much more competent than he is to ensure the actual criminals get actually charged.

If you know any white collar criminal defense lawyer who can help me ensure Christopher Angus and Stella Huh are featured in the Timothy Barton criminal case this November please shoot me an email at aaronmwall@icloud.com.

Thank you for reading or watching & please share this anywhere you can!