# Google’s Enforcement on “Site Reputation Manipulation” and Parasite SEO: Key Insights
Recently, if you’ve observed a surge of unusual websites overtaking search results for “top” product reviews, you’re in good company—and so is Google. The tech titan has recognized this pattern and is implementing major alterations to its ranking algorithms to address what it refers to as “site reputation manipulation.”
This newly introduced policy adjustment, detailed in a blog post titled [“Updating our site reputation manipulation policy”](https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2024/11/site-reputation-abuse), targets an escalating concern where reputable websites exploit their domain authority to advertise third-party content, frequently taking the form of product reviews. Although profitable for the involved sites, this strategy has resulted in a compromised search experience for users, prompting Google to take a stand.
## Defining Site Reputation Manipulation
Site reputation manipulation involves the act of utilizing the domain authority of a well-known website to elevate the visibility of third-party content that would otherwise struggle for recognition. This method is especially common in product review sectors, where sites that typically focus on news or other unrelated content suddenly start posting reviews on products like CBD gummies, pet insurance, or pest control services.
According to Google, this approach aims to “capitalize on the host’s already-established ranking signals.” Simply put, websites possessing strong search engine optimization (SEO) histories are permitting—or even generating—third-party content to rank higher than warranted, solely because it resides on a domain with an established reputation.
The outcome? An unsatisfactory search experience for users who may be misled into believing they’re accessing expert reviews from a credible source, when, in fact, they’re being directed toward affiliate links or product endorsements that have little relation to the site’s primary focus.
## The Economic Consequences of Google’s Policy Shift
The financial implications of this enforcement are considerable. A report from [AdWeek](https://www.adweek.com/media/cnn-forbes-lose-millions-google-seo-policy/) revealed that search analytics firm Sistrix estimated that significant websites like Forbes, Wall Street Journal, CNN, Fortune, and Time have cumulatively suffered a loss of $7.5 million in traffic revenue as a consequence of Google’s revised regulations.
For example, Time’s affiliate review platform, [Time Stamped](https://time.com/shopping/), experienced a staggering 97% drop in its search rankings, while Forbes Advisor faced a 43% decrease. These declines are specific to the affiliate subdomains of these sites, indicating that their main news URLs remain unscathed. Nevertheless, the diminished traffic to these subdomains is a major setback for their revenue channels, which often depend on affiliate marketing.
## How Forbes and Similar Sites Have Exploited “Parasite SEO”
One prominent case of site reputation manipulation is associated with Forbes, a reputable business news organization. Forbes has interests in [Forbes Marketplace](https://www.forbes.com/advisor/about-us/) (often referred to as Forbes Advisor), which has long led search results for queries like “top CBD gummies” and “top pet insurance.”
SEO analyst Lily Ray pointed out that Forbes Marketplace had remained a top-ranking result for these search terms for what felt like “an age.” The site also achieved high rankings for unrelated queries, such as “how to eliminate roaches.” When users clicked on these high-ranking results and subsequently made purchases, Forbes reaped commissions via affiliate links.
This practice, termed “Parasite SEO” by SEO authority Lars Lofgren, has expanded beyond Forbes. Lofgren’s analysis showed that Forbes Marketplace had also offered SEO-enhancing review services to other major entities like CNN and USA Today. These setups enabled third-party content to benefit from the domain authority of trusted news platforms, leading to improved search rankings and increased affiliate earnings.
## Google’s Reaction: A Significant SEO Overhaul
Google’s revised policy is intended to restrict such “exploitative” SEO behaviors. In its blog entry, Google mentioned it had assessed “circumstances where there might be varying degrees of first-party involvement.” In essence, even if a site asserts editorial oversight or standards for its third-party content, it doesn’t alter the inherent nature of the content itself as being fundamentally third-party.
“No level of first-party involvement modifies the intrinsic third-party nature of the content or the unfair, exploitative aspect of trying to benefit from the host site’s ranking signals,” Google stated. Consequently, Google is categorizing this content as spam, potentially resulting in a drastic reduction in search rankings.
The ramifications of this policy shift are already resonating across the internet. Sites that have relied substantially on third-party content to enhance their rankings are witnessing their traffic nosedive, prompting many to hastily revise their approaches.
## Implications for Users and Publishers
For users, this modification should
