Google started rolling out the September 2023 helpful content update on 14 September 2023. If you saw it in the news and wondered what it means for your site, here is the short answer: Google improved the classifier behind its helpful content system, and it quietly rewrote parts of its guidance on the same day.
Those guidance changes are the part I think most site owners will miss. They touch AI-written content, third-party content on your domain, fake “freshness” tricks and what to do if your traffic drops. Below I go through each change, what it means in plain words, and what I would check on your site this week.
What Is the September 2023 Helpful Content Update?
The helpful content system is an automated part of Google’s ranking. It looks for content made mainly to rank in search, not to help people. If a site has a lot of that kind of content, the system adds a site-wide signal that can hold back the whole site.
Google first launched it in August 2022, for English searches. In December 2022 it was updated again and expanded to all languages. This September update is the next step.
Here are the main facts so far:
- Start date: Google’s Search Status Dashboard posted on 14 September 2023 that the update was released.
- What changed: Google says the update “improves our classifier”. The classifier is the program that decides which content looks unhelpful.
- Rollout time: Google says it will take about two weeks to complete.
- Timing: It comes only one week after the August 2023 core update finished rolling out on 7 September.
Google has not shared how many searches will be affected. So, as with any rollout, I would not jump to conclusions from one or two days of data.
If you are new to the system, my earlier piece on what “people-first content” means explains the basics from the first launch.
What Changed in the Helpful Content Guidance
Along with the update, Google edited two help pages. One explains the helpful content system itself. The other is the “Creating helpful, reliable, people-first content” page, which has the self-assessment questions many of us already use.
Here is a quick summary before I go through each change.
| Topic | Before | Now |
|---|---|---|
| Who makes the content | Content “written by people, for people” | Content “created for people” |
| Third-party content | No specific advice on this page | May count in site-wide signals; Google recommends blocking unrelated or unsupervised content from indexing |
| Expertise question | “Written by” an expert or enthusiast | “Written or reviewed by” an expert or enthusiast |
| Changing dates | Not mentioned | New warning about changing dates without real updates |
| Adding or removing content | Not mentioned | New warning that doing it just to look “fresh” won’t help |
| Traffic drops | General advice | Self-assess, then fix or remove content that seems unhelpful |
“Written by People” Becomes “Created for People”
The old description said the system helps people see “original, helpful content written by people, for people”. The new wording drops “written by people”. It now talks about helpful content “created for people”.
This is a small edit with a clear message. Google cares about whether content helps the reader, not about whether a human typed every word. That matches what Google said earlier this year in its guidance on AI-generated content: the method of making content is not the problem, the purpose is.
In my view, this is not a green light for mass AI content. The same system still targets content made mainly to rank. If you use AI tools to churn out hundreds of thin pages on topics you know nothing about, that is exactly what the classifier is built to catch.
New Advice on Third-Party Content
This is the biggest addition. Google now says that if you host third-party content on your main site or on your subdomains, that content may be included in site-wide signals, such as the helpfulness of your content.
Third-party content means pages made by someone else but published on your domain. Common examples are:
- Coupon or discount sections run by a partner company on a news site.
- Sponsored “best product” pages written by an outside agency.
- A subdomain rented out to another business that publishes its own articles.
- Large sections of guest posts that nobody on your team edits.
Google’s advice is direct. If that content is largely independent of your main site’s purpose, or is produced without close supervision or involvement from you, Google recommends blocking it from being indexed.
Why does this matter? Some sites rank well because of their reputation, and outside parties use that reputation to rank unrelated content. Google is now telling site owners that this content can drag on the signals for the whole site. I would take this seriously even if your site has only a small section like this.
“Written or Reviewed by” an Expert
One of the self-assessment questions used to ask whether content was written by an expert or enthusiast who clearly knows the topic well. It now reads “written or reviewed by”.
This reflects how many real teams work. A writer drafts the piece, and a subject expert checks it. Google is saying that model can still meet the bar, as long as the review is real.
If you use expert review, show it. A short “Reviewed by” line with the reviewer’s name and a link to their bio helps readers trust the page. It also lines up with the “Experience” part of E-E-A-T, which Google added to its rater guidelines last December. I covered that change in E-A-T becomes E-E-A-T.
Two New Warnings About Freshness Tricks
Google added two new questions to the list of signs of search engine-first content. Search engine-first content is content made mainly for rankings, not for readers.
The first new question asks whether you are changing the date of pages to make them seem fresh when the content has not substantially changed.
The second asks whether you are adding a lot of new content, or removing a lot of older content, mainly because you believe it will help your rankings by making your site seem “fresh”. Google answers its own question in the guidance: no, it won’t.
I see the date trick often. A site updates the year in the title and the “last updated” date, but the article itself has not changed. Readers notice, and now Google has said plainly that it is a warning sign.
The second warning is also useful. Some people read Google’s past advice about removing unhelpful content and started deleting old posts in bulk. Google is now clear that removing content has no value on its own. It only helps when the content you remove was unhelpful.
What Google Now Says About Traffic Drops
Google added two simple lines about what to do. First, if you are producing helpful content, you don’t need to do anything. Google even says the system may be good for your site.
Second, if you notice a traffic change you suspect is linked to this system, Google says you should self-assess your content. Then fix or remove any content that seems unhelpful. Google points to its people-first content questions for that self-check.
None of this is new in spirit, but it is now written down clearly. There is still no quick fix and no request form. The work is improving the content itself.
What These Changes Mean for AI Content
The “created for people” wording will get the most attention, so it is worth being clear about what it does and does not say.
What it says: using AI to help create content is not, by itself, against Google’s guidance. What it does not say: AI content will rank because it exists. The system still looks at whether the content is useful, original and made for a real audience.
Here is how I think about it on my own projects:
- Fine: using AI to outline, summarise your own notes, or tidy up a draft that an expert then checks and improves.
- Risky: publishing AI drafts with no editing, no first-hand detail and no expert review.
- Likely to hurt: producing large numbers of pages on many topics only because they have search volume.
The new “written or reviewed by” wording fits this well. An expert review step is the simplest way to make AI-assisted content trustworthy.
Who Should Pay Close Attention to This Update
Every site that depends on Google traffic should watch its numbers. But based on what changed, I would pay extra attention if your site:
- Hosts coupon, deals, review or “best of” sections run by a partner.
- Rents out subdomains or folders to other businesses.
- Publishes large amounts of content outside its main topic.
- Has scaled up AI content quickly with little editing.
- Updates dates on old articles without changing the content.
- Was already hit by an earlier helpful content update and has not fixed the cause.
In my experience, small businesses that write about their own products and services rarely need to worry much. The risk sits with sites that publish lots of content mainly to capture search traffic.
How to Check Your Site During the Rollout
Google says the update will take about two weeks. Here is the process I follow during a rollout like this.
- Save a baseline now. In Search Console, export clicks and impressions by page for the four weeks before 14 September. This gives you a clean “before” picture.
- Mark the key dates. Note 22 August to 7 September for the core update and 14 September for this update. Any drop needs to be matched against the right window.
- Wait for the rollout to finish. Rankings often move up and down during a rollout. I don’t make content decisions on partial data.
- Compare by section, not just by site. Use the Pages report filtered by folder or subdomain. A drop across the whole site points to a site-wide signal. A drop in one section points to a problem there.
- Review third-party content. List every section made by outside parties. Decide whether each one fits your site’s purpose and whether you supervise it.
- Run the self-assessment. Go through your weakest pages with Google’s people-first questions. Mark each page as keep, improve, merge or remove.
- Fix the real problems. Improve thin pages with first-hand detail, merge overlapping pages, and remove pages with no value for readers.
For step 6, my guide on how to audit your site for unhelpful content walks through the full process with a simple spreadsheet setup.
How to Handle Third-Party Content on Your Site
If you find a section that is mostly someone else’s content, you have three options. Which one is right depends on how closely it fits your site and how much control you have.
Option 1: Bring It Closer to Your Site
If the content is useful to your audience, take real ownership. Have your team edit it, check facts and make sure it fits your main topic. Google’s wording is about content made without close supervision or involvement, so real involvement changes the picture.
Option 2: Block It From Indexing
If the content does not fit your site’s purpose, or you cannot supervise it, Google recommends blocking it from being indexed. The usual way is a noindex robots meta tag, which tells Google not to show the page in search results. Add it to the <head> of each page:
<meta name="robots" content="noindex">For non-HTML files, you can send the same instruction as an HTTP header: X-Robots-Tag: noindex.
Don’t block these pages in robots.txt if you want them removed from the index. If Google cannot crawl a page, it cannot see the noindex tag.
Option 3: Remove It or Move It
If the content has no value for your readers, or the partner relationship is only about traffic, removing it may be the cleanest choice. Another option is for the partner to publish it on their own domain instead.
I’d make this decision with the business side in the room. These sections often bring in revenue, so the trade-off needs to be clear before anything is removed.
Mistakes I’d Avoid Right Now
Rollouts make people nervous, and nervous decisions often cause more damage than the update itself. Here is what I would not do:
- Deleting content in bulk. Google’s new guidance says removing content to seem fresh won’t help. Only remove pages after you review them.
- Changing dates on old posts. Only update the date when the content has really changed.
- Blaming the wrong update. With the core update ending on 7 September, check your dates carefully before deciding what caused a change.
- Expecting a fast recovery. Google has said before that the helpful content signal can apply for months after a site improves. Fixes take time to show.
- Chasing word counts. Google has said it has no preferred word count. Longer is not better if it adds nothing.
If your traffic changed in late August or early September, read my notes on the August 2023 core update before you assume this update is the cause.
Final Thoughts on the September 2023 Helpful Content Update
The September 2023 helpful content update brings an improved classifier, but the guidance changes are what I would act on first. Google now says content should be created for people, no matter how it is made. It warns that third-party content can affect your whole site. It also calls out fake freshness and bulk deletion.
Your next step is simple. Save your Search Console baseline today, let the rollout finish, and use the waiting time to review any third-party sections and your weakest pages. If the content helps your readers, Google says you don’t need to do anything else.
