E-E-A-T: The Only Answer for the Open Web

By Shaun Anderson

E-E-A-T is a beautiful concept when you see it. I think it is the only contender to save the open web.

If E-E-A-T didn't exist, the most efficient "content creator" (AI) would win every time. Google is essentially trying to subsidise human creation to save its own product.

Yet, there is still a loud contingent that claims it doesn't matter. These are the folk who see search as a series of loopholes to be exploited, or are the type of persons adept at identifying those loopholes, i.e. SEOs.

To be honest, flat-out denial of E-E-A-T at this stage is a bit like the steamroller scene in Austin Powers.

You know the one. The security guard sees the steamroller coming from a mile away. It is moving at 1 mph. He has a full ten seconds to step out of the way. Instead, he just stands there, holding up his hand and screaming "No!", right up until the moment he gets squashed.

E-E-A-T is coming. It has been coming hard since 2018. It is slow, it is heavy, and it is inevitable. You can stand there debating whether it is a "direct ranking factor" if you want, but while you are arguing semantics, the steamroller is already flattening your affiliate site.

We are living through the "Market for Lemons" on a global scale. In a 2025 landscape where generative AI can vomit out infinite content for zero cost, the value of unverified information is plummeting to zero.

If that happens, Google dies.

That is why E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, and Trust) is no longer just a helpful acronym for Quality Raters. It is the Human Survival Protocol for the Open Web.

And thanks to the recent API leaks, we now have the receipts to prove it.

In my earlier analysis of the leak, I went beyond the headlines to prove this connection. I took the abstract concepts of the E-E-A-T framework and mapped them directly against the 14,014 attributes revealed in the Google Content Warehouse API. The results were conclusive. I found that a significant percentage of the entire codebase was not dedicated to keywords or links, but was effectively acting as proxies for:

• Experience: [contentEffort, originalContentScore]
• Expertise: [topicEmbeddings, siteFocusScore]
• Trust: [siteAuthority, spamBrain, ymylNewsV2Score]

We are talking about hard-coded variables like [authorReputationScore] and [scamness] designed to measure the unmeasurable [quality.nsr].

The Hot Air Balloon: Sandbags vs Helium

One of the most striking things about the leak was the sheer volume of signals. It clarified that Google is not a monolith; it is a system of competing philosophies.

The best way to understand this is to picture your website as a Hot Air Balloon.

For years, SEOs have been obsessed with cutting the ropes. We fix 404 errors, we improve page speed, we disavow toxic links. We do this to remove the weight.

In the language of the leak, these weights are the Sandbags. They are the negative spam algorithms and "Labels" that the system attaches to your site to hold it down. The leak revealed thousands of these specific sandbags, such as [spamBrain, scamness, gibberishScore, unwantedContent].

But here is the truth the leak exposed: Cutting the sandbags doesn't make you fly.

Removing a penalty just leaves you sitting on the ground, neutral and invisible. To rise, you need buoyancy. You need Helium.

E-E-A-T is the Helium.

The leak confirmed the existence of positive, lifting attributes like [contentEffort] and [authorReputation]. These are the signals that provide the upward thrust. You can have a technically perfect site with zero sandbags (no spam labels), but without the helium of Experience and Expertise, you will never leave the ground.

The Engine Room: The Dance of PageRank vs Trust

We need to be precise about what this "Helium" actually is.

A large part of E-E-A-T is PageRank. In fact, in some cases, theoretically speaking, E-E-A-T is—and is only—PageRank. I very much agree with David Quaid (New York SEO) on this matter: PageRank is still the fundamental engine of the web.

Without PageRank, you can't rank. It is that simple. If you have zero links from trusted entities, you have zero authority to distribute.

However, the algorithm is no longer just a math problem. It is a dance of competing philosophies.

On one side, you have the cold, hard logic of PageRank (The Vote). On the other side, you have the nuanced, soft signals of E-E-A-T (The Veto).

Think of E-E-A-T as the Trust Override Button.

Google is effectively saying: "You are not ranking just because of PageRank anymore. The more data we find out about you over time, the more we reserve the right to press the Override Button."

You can have all the PageRank in the world (high lift), but if the "Trust" signal (the override) is triggered—due to fake authorship, scams, or lack of reputation—the engine cuts out. The dance ends. The balloon drops.

The Smoking Gun: contentEffort

For a long time, the "loophole" crowd called E-E-A-T a fuzzy concept. They said it wasn’t in the code.

The leaks proved otherwise. Deep in the API documentation, we found the attribute: [contentEffort].

This is the mathematical proof that Google is actively trying to calculate "Human Labour". The algorithm is hunting for "intellectual rigour and creative investment". It is looking for the things an LLM is designed to minimise:

• Originality: Not just rehashed text, but new data.
• Complexity: Structure that implies thought, not prediction.
• Multimedia: Evidence that you actually exist in the physical world.

The Assassin: The "Firefly" Algorithm

While [contentEffort] is the carrot (the Helium), we also found the ultimate stick (the heaviest Sandbag).

Buried in the leak is a module labelled [QualityCopiaFireflySiteSignal].

At first glance, this looks like a system designed to promote a site. In nature, the firefly algorithm is an optimisation technique used to find the "brightest" light in the darkness. You might assume this is just Google trying to find the best content to reward it.

But that is exactly why I think it is a demotion engine.

In the zero-sum game of search, a system designed to isolate the "brightest" organic signals is, by definition, a system designed to cast everything else into the dark.

So, we must identify the converse. What is the darkness?

It is Spam.

But we need to update our definition of the word. Spam is no longer just pharmaceutical hacks or casinos. In 2025, Spam is simply Noise. It is the absence of [contentEffort]. It is the infinite grey goo of low-quality, programmatic content that lacks a human pulse.

It seems Google is using this bio-mimicry to detect the "synchronised flashing" of AI spam.

• The Kill Zone: Make no mistake, this is already happening. E-E-A-T is currently suppressing a massive number of sites. Based on the leak data regarding [quality.nsr] (Site Authority), there appears to be a definitive "Kill Zone". Sites with a Q Score (Quality Score) in the range of 0 to 0.4 are essentially dead on arrival. They are being suppressed as spam. And looking at the volatility in the SERPs, it is evident that the suppression threshold is likely well above 0.4.
• The Demotion Result: Once the system identifies your Q Score is in this range—often due to scaled, low-effort content—it casts you into the dark.

Google defines this behaviour explicitly as "Scaled Content Abuse":

"Scaled content abuse is when many pages are generated for the primary purpose of manipulating search rankings and not helping users... no matter how it's created." — Google Spam Policies

If [contentEffort] is looking for humanity, Firefly is hunting for the fake simulation of it. It is the system that ensures "Scaled Content" equals "Zero Visibility".

The Augmented Human: Redefining "Searchable"

This leads us to a new reality. We have to redefine what it means for content to be "Searchable".

In 2025, being searchable is no longer about keywords or schema markup. Being searchable is all about E-E-A-T and the Human in the Loop.

This is the dividing line in the new web economy:

• Without the Augmented Human: The creative aspect is gone. It’s just Spam. It is a commodity that triggers the Firefly filters (Sandbags), falls into the 0.4 Kill Zone, and gets de-indexed.
• With the Augmented Human: It becomes the most powerful creative tool ever seen.

Google isn't a Luddite. They explicitly state in their guidelines that AI can be a "critical tool" for expression. When you put the human back in the loop—using AI as an exoskeleton to amplify your experience rather than replace it—you unlock a level of productivity and depth that was previously impossible.

The algorithm isn't killing AI content; it is killing unsupervised AI content. It is rewarding the Cyborg who uses the machine to build something better than either could build alone.

Trust is the Only Asset You Can't Compress

AI is a compression engine. It can take a 2,000-word article and compress the information into three bullet points.

But AI cannot compress Liability.

When I write a post on Searchable, my reputation of 25 years is on the line. I have "skin in the game". If I give you bad advice, I lose trust. When Gemini or ChatGPT writes a post, no one is on the line.

This logic is the foundation of my role at Searchable.

My key aim at Searchable, beyond the initial SEO work and these blog posts, is to align our scoring aspects directly with these Google guidelines. We are tuning the content writing agent in a completely transparent manner. This series of blog posts should indicate exactly where Searchable is going: we are building the infrastructure for high-quality, expert-verified, human-in-the-loop content that meets Google’s guidelines by design, not by accident.

This is why Trust is the most important letter in E-E-A-T. It is the digital notary that validates reality. Google needs to know there is a human standing behind the content who can be held accountable.

The Consensus: Who Else Is Tracking This?

I am not the only one sounding the alarm. While I focus on the technical architecture of [contentEffort] and Firefly, the smartest minds in our industry are seeing the same steamroller coming.

If you want to survive, you need to understand the full picture. Here are the other experts defining the E-E-A-T landscape right now:

The Investigators (Evidence & Guidelines)

• Lily Ray: She is the leading investigator on "fake authorship". Her work proves that "Real Expertise cannot be faked". If you use AI faces for your authors, she has documented exactly how Google will crush you.
• Dr Marie Haynes: The historian of the Quality Raters Guidelines. She understands the "why" behind the algorithm updates better than anyone. She correctly identified that "Unidentified Reputation Issues" can tank a site even if the content is perfect.
• Glenn Gabe: The surgeon you call when things go wrong. His case studies on "Unhelpful Content" recoveries are essential reading. He bridges the gap between technical failure and content failure.

The Architects (Entities & Brands)

• Kevin Indig: He argues for "Brand as a Moat". His thesis aligns with my fear that the "Rich will get Richer". He teaches that you must become an Entity that Google must cite, rather than just another blog chasing keywords.
• Olaf Kopp: The semantic scientist. He argues that E-E-A-T is fundamentally about Brand Verification. You cannot have authority without a presence in the Knowledge Graph.
• Jason Barnard: The "Brand SERP" guy. He focuses on the "Who" in E-E-A-T. If Google doesn't have a clear Knowledge Panel for your brand, Jason is the one who teaches you how to feed the machine the right facts.

The Engineers (Tactics & Math)

• Koray Tuğberk GÜBÜR: The mathematician of SEO. He builds "Topical Maps" that are so semantically complete they force Google to recognise expertise. It is the extreme opposite of "writing for humans", yet it achieves the same result: authority.
• Cyrus Shepard: He focuses on User Signals. He argues that Google measures E-E-A-T largely through how users interact with your page. If they click and stay, you have demonstrated value.
• Gael Breton: The pragmatist behind Authority Hacker. He shows how smaller affiliate sites can still build E-E-A-T without a New York Times budget, using clever tactics and digital PR.

The Uncomfortable Truth: The Rich Will Get Richer

I would be remiss if I didn't add a dose of reality here. This "Survival Protocol" comes with a cost.

The leaks indicate that [contentEffort] is weighed against [siteAuthority].

This means the "Open Web" is about to become a lot more elitist. Established entities, those with long histories, physical footprints, and years of accrued signals, will be given the benefit of the doubt.

New creators? The "Cyborgs" trying to break in? You will have a mountain to climb. You can't just be "as good as" the big guys anymore. You have to be undeniable. You have to prove you are real.

The Irony: Control as a Gift

Let's not be naive about this. Of course, Google controls the web with this system. And it is obviously profitable for them to do so. They are not filtering out spam out of the goodness of their hearts; they are doing it because low-quality content kills their ad revenue.

But here is the irony.

In a world where AI can produce infinite noise for free, we actually need a gatekeeper. We need a filter. Google’s heavy-handed control, driven entirely by its own self-interest, might end up being Google’s greatest gift to the open web.

By enforcing E-E-A-T, they are accidentally creating a sanctuary for human creativity. They are building the only lifeboat that can stay afloat in the flood.

Summary

E-E-A-T is not an SEO tactic. It is anthropology.

It is the set of rules we have agreed upon to differentiate humans from the machines. If you want to survive the AI flood, stop looking for the loophole. Start building the "Trust Anchors", such as the bios, the history, and the unique data, that prove you are one of us.

Because if the algorithm can't tell you're human, you're already invisible.

With that in mind, I will be posting less and focusing more on the Searchable.com system.

Welcome to Searchable.com.

About the Author: Shaun Anderson (AKA Hobo Web) is a primary source investigator of the Google Content Warehouse API Leak with over 25 years of experience in website development and SEO (search engine optimisation).

AI Usage Disclosure: Shaun uses generative AI when specifically writing about his own experiences, ideas, stories, concepts, tools, tool documentation or research. His tool of choice for this process is Google Gemini Pro 2.5. All content was conceived, edited, and verified as correct by Shaun (and is under constant development). See the

Searchable AI policy