{"slug": "google-just-released-an-ai-opt-out-feature-your-competitors-hope-you-use-it", "title": "Google just released an AI opt-out feature. Your competitors hope you use it.", "summary": "Google released new controls allowing website owners to opt out of AI-powered search experiences like AI Overviews and AI Mode, along with new AI reporting in Search Console. The feature, currently in beta, has sparked debate among publishers, but opting out does not reduce AI usage—it only removes a brand's content from those results, giving competitors more visibility.", "body_md": "[SEO](https://searchengineland.com/library/seo) »\n\n# Google just released an AI opt-out feature. Your competitors hope you use it.\n\n## Users aren't opting out of AI Overviews or AI Mode. If your content disappears from those experiences, someone else will take its place.\n\nFor the past two years, the SEO industry has been asking Google for two things: more visibility into AI traffic and more control over how content appears in AI experiences.\n\nLast week, Google started delivering [both](https://blog.google/products-and-platforms/products/search/new-controls-website-owners/).\n\nThey announced [new controls](https://blog.google/products-and-platforms/products/search/new-controls-website-owners/) that allow site owners to opt out of AI-powered experiences (AI Overviews, AI Mode, etc.) and [introduced new AI reporting](https://developers.google.com/search/blog/2026/06/gen-ai-performance-reports) within Google Search Console. *(Note that both of these are in early beta and are not yet available for everyone.)*\n\nOn paper, this is a victory for things moving in the right direction for publishers.\n\nInstead, the conversation immediately split into camps. Some focused on the new reporting. Others focused on the new controls and began debating whether to opt out of AI altogether.\n\nWhat caught my attention wasn’t the announcement itself. It was how quickly the conversation shifted from *gaining visibility* to *voluntarily giving it up*.\n\n## What this actually means\n\nBefore we go any further, let’s clear up what Google *actually* announced.\n\nThe new controls **do not turn off AI Overviews, stop people from using AI Mode, or slow AI adoption**. Users are still going to search and ask questions, and increasingly do so through AI-powered experiences.\n\nGoogle introduced a way for publishers to have more control over whether their content can be surfaced in those experiences. *(Was this the plan all along, or was it exclusively because of the **UK Competition and Markets Authority demanding it**?)*\n\nThat’s an important distinction because many people are treating this as a decision about AI itself. **It isn’t.**\n\n- AI Mode doesn’t disappear because a publisher opts out.\n- AI Overviews don’t disappear when a website decides not to participate.\n\nThe user experience remains largely unchanged. The only thing that changes is *which brands are eligible* to appear.\n\nIf Expedia opted out tomorrow, people wouldn’t stop planning vacations. If NerdWallet opted out tomorrow ([ like I did their stock](https://www.seoforlunch.com/p/dont-trust-google)), people wouldn’t stop researching credit cards. Google would simply surface someone else in its place.\n\n**This isn’t a decision about whether AI succeeds or fails. It’s a decision about whether your brand is present when customers choose to use it.**\n\n## Why AI opt-out sounds good but is actually a trap\n\nI understand the appeal. Publishers are worried about losing more clicks, frustrated by changing search behavior, and concerned about how AI systems use their content.\n\nThose concerns are beyond valid.\n\nWhere I disagree is with the assumption that opting out changes user behavior.\n\n**It doesn’t.**\n\nUsers aren’t deciding whether to use AI based on your participation. They’re deciding whether AI helps them get answers faster. For a growing number of searches, it does.\n\nThat’s why opting out of AI inclusion and opting users out of AI experiences are two different things.\n\nA publisher can choose not to participate. Users can still use AI Mode. Google can still answer the question. The only thing that changes is which brands are eligible to appear.\n\n**That’s the trap.**\n\nThe practical outcome isn’t less AI. It’s more visibility for your competitors. They gain citations, exposure, and the opportunity to become the trusted answer, while your brand becomes less visible.\n\nIf the concern is that AI is changing how customers discover information, disappearing from AI-powered experiences feels like a pretty dumb move.\n\nThe challenge isn’t finding ways to be less visible. It’s finding ways to remain visible as search behavior continues to evolve.\n\n## Google finally gives us AI data… and SEOs still complain.\n\nThe other part of Google’s announcement that received less attention was the reporting.\n\nFor years, the industry has been asking for more visibility into AI-driven search experiences. We wanted better attribution, better reporting, and a clearer understanding of how users interact with AI-powered search.\n\nNow Google is beginning to provide some of that visibility, and almost immediately the conversation shifted to why it isn’t enough. Note that many of these screenshots are illustrative and are even from industry friends and well-respected search practitioners in our space. No shade intended to any one individual, simply wanting to illustrate the movement.\n\n[Maybe that’s true. The data isn’t perfect. The reporting doesn’t answer every question. I’d love more visibility into citations, AI Mode interactions, and ](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/%24s_!hCd-!,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Ff50a3313-ed5c-456f-821b-e7e97ee01136_894x213.png)~~better~~ any sort of attribution modeling.\n\nI especially agree with Dan’s post above, but waiting for perfect data has never been a winning strategy.\n\nSEO has always operated with imperfect data. We’ve spent years making decisions based on [estimated search volume](https://www.seoforlunch.com/p/no-keywords), [incomplete attribution](https://www.seoforlunch.com/p/seo-attribution), and [reporting limitations](https://www.seoforlunch.com/p/measuring-seo). Some of the biggest wins in my career came from acting on directional signals rather than perfect certainty.\n\nThe same applies here.\n\nThe mistake is treating every reporting enhancement as either perfect or useless. We’re getting more visibility than we had six months ago, and we’ll likely have more six months from now.\n\n## My reporting approach: SEO+ reporting\n\nPart of the reason this debate exists is that many teams are still measuring success through a traditional SEO lens.\n\nTraditional reporting focuses on clicks, rankings *(ewww)*, traffic, and conversions. Those metrics still matter, and I don’t see them disappearing anytime soon. The problem is that **they’re no longer telling the entire story.**\n\nUsers are discovering brands across more surfaces than ever before, especially outside of the Google ecosystem. Traditional organic search still matters, but so do AI Overviews, AI Mode, ChatGPT, Perplexity, Bing Copilot, Reddit, YouTube, and a growing list of ecosystems users rely on in their purchasing journey.\n\nThat’s why I’ve started thinking about reporting as “**SEO+”** rather than just SEO. *(Yeah, I’m lazy and used the streaming naming convention “+” because… yeah, lazy.)*\n\nThe goal isn’t to abandon traditional metrics. The goal is to expand what we’re measuring. Alongside traffic and conversions, I want to understand where brands are being cited, how often they’re being mentioned, how many unique URLs are being cited, whether branded search demand is increasing, how AI platforms reference them, and whether visibility is expanding even when attribution remains borked.\n\nThis is where I think many organizations are making the same mistake they made with content years ago.\n\nWith one of my clients, a lot of our content influences revenue months before a customer converts. Looking only at last-click reporting dramatically understates the impact. That’s why I started reporting on “[content assists](https://www.seoforlunch.com/p/performance-narratives)” as a key metric in their reporting. AI visibility is creating a similar challenge. A customer might first encounter your brand through an AI Overview, revisit you through traditional search, and ultimately convert through a completely different channel *(probably a paid channel… ‘cause everyone loves ROAS).*\n\nThe influence is real even when the attribution path is messy.\n\nThat’s why I’m less interested in measuring traffic alone and more interested in measuring discoverability. The brands that consistently appear across search, AI, and recommendation platforms are building familiarity long before a conversion occurs.\n\n## The wrong question\n\nMost of the discussion around Google’s announcement has centered on a single question:\n\n*Should I opt out of AI?*\n\nI think that’s the wrong question.\n\nThe better question is whether you can afford to be absent from the places where customers increasingly discover information, products, and brands.\n\nUsers aren’t waiting for the SEO industry to decide whether AI is good or bad. They’re already using it.\n\nThat’s why I view Google’s announcement less as an AI opt-out feature and more as a strategic decision point. Opting out doesn’t remove AI from the equation. It simply increases the likelihood that someone else becomes the answer instead.\n\nSome brands will use it.\n\nTheir competitors are hoping they do\n\nWill you lean into change, or will you be another person complaining that Google owes [them free clicks](https://www.seoforlunch.com/p/free-clicks)?\n\n*This post first appeared on the author’s website and is republished here with permission.*\n\n*Contributing authors are invited to create content for Search Engine Land and are chosen for their expertise and contribution to the search community. Our contributors work under the oversight of the editorial staff and contributions are checked for quality and relevance to our readers. Search Engine Land is owned by Semrush. Contributor was not asked to make any direct or indirect mentions of Semrush. The opinions they express are their own.*", "url": "https://wpnews.pro/news/google-just-released-an-ai-opt-out-feature-your-competitors-hope-you-use-it", "canonical_source": "https://searchengineland.com/google-ai-opt-out-feature-competitors-480375", "published_at": "2026-06-18 12:00:00+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-06-18 12:33:11.395200+00:00", "lang": "en", "topics": ["ai-products", "ai-tools", "ai-policy", "ai-safety", "ai-research"], "entities": ["Google", "Google Search Console", "UK Competition and Markets Authority", "Expedia", "NerdWallet"], "alternates": {"html": "https://wpnews.pro/news/google-just-released-an-ai-opt-out-feature-your-competitors-hope-you-use-it", "markdown": "https://wpnews.pro/news/google-just-released-an-ai-opt-out-feature-your-competitors-hope-you-use-it.md", "text": "https://wpnews.pro/news/google-just-released-an-ai-opt-out-feature-your-competitors-hope-you-use-it.txt", "jsonld": "https://wpnews.pro/news/google-just-released-an-ai-opt-out-feature-your-competitors-hope-you-use-it.jsonld"}}