
Here to collect and amplify bad Google SERPs and AI Overviews, tag your examples with #GoogEnough. Accepting submissions via DM if you want to remain anonymous.
Mountain View, CA
Joined April 2024
- Tweets1.8K
- Following130
- Followers3.6K
- Likes5.4K
Friendly reminder: GooglEvil does not care about you. You are just a source of revenue for the monopoly. So when they offer to personalize something, imagine they’re Little Red Riding Hood’s grandma asking you to come closer. It’s just a wolf trying to eat you.
AIOs now appear for more than 80% of searches, up from roughly 15% two years ago. Meanwhile, Goog Enough’s website says “AI Overviews are only shown when our systems determine that it is additive to classic Search, and as such, often don't trigger.” Goog is 100% full of shit.
Which CNN reviews are we supposed to trust? The ones flat-out provided by the subject? Just the ones with sponsored products throughout? Or none of them because it’s not news?
So you try to regulate GooglEvil, and they show you what life is like without the cloud? Is that how it’s going to be?
CNN is taking payoffs from foreign governments in exchange for helping to juice their tourism. Think twice before taking travel recommendations from the “worldwide leader in news.” You might be getting the worldwide leader in reputation abuse instead.
Finally, Congress is beginning to see GooglEvil for what it is: a greedy thief willing to hurt our kids if it makes them an extra billion. Sens. Richard Blumenthal & Josh Hawley have some questions & Goog has until Nov. 2 to respond. Hopefully, we get some actual enforcement.
Goog’s own Search team on PDFs: no idea of the size limit, unsure if embedded images get processed, “trying to extrapolate from what we do know.” In AI Overviews? “I would think so.” Classic Goog Enough - not knowing your product.
We can all agree that GooglEvil has been lying about how popular its AI products really are. But Forbes Advisor is playing with fire here. It’s like putting up a billboard complaining about the police chief when you have bodies buried in the backyard.
“While Google has repeatedly said that users are happier with search results when they see an AI Overview, we found no real increase in satisfaction among our participants.” @ForbesAdvisor
forbes.com/advisor/business/…
What are the chances this stays limited to news? CNN thinks everything is breaking news, and it has already shown that it’s all too willing to abuse that news reputation in order to sell trinkets. Another win for the site reputation abusers in this Goog Enough landscape.
GooglEvil cares so little about an open, healthy web ecosystem that it actually wastes resources serving fake search results to tracking tools. Now, we have even less visibility into what’s really going on, and GoogEnoughers can spread their lies more effectively.
Incredible: Not only is Google working to block AI crawlers, but @nozzleio uncovered evidence that Google is deliberately serving FAKE search results to scrapers
The "poisoned" search results look real, but w/ garbage data. This influences AI crawlers, scrapers, & rank trackers.
Is CNN still in the news business? The most valuable pages on its website make it seem like CNN is at least as focused on the stock market, credit cards, and using AI to produce content. Curious that Google still extends the news reputation to the rest.
Remember when Goog Enough said they’d only show AIOs when it’s helpful? I guess they changed their policy.
There’s so much wrong with this. The title says 2025, Google thinks it was last updated in 2023, and can we really trust this is the Forbes that earned its reputation? If Goog Enough thinks the masters of site reputation abuse are fabricating dates, why include them in 2026?
GooglEvil thinks its AI can do your job…This is step one in Google replacing the rest of the SERP with AI results, to go along with the AIOs and PAAs. Let the AI learn your business, then bye-bye human labor.
GooglEvil is making it easier to tell whether content is AI generated, but that’s more for Goog’s benefit than anything else. Goog is spending a lot of money on AI spam prevention, and in its monopolistic/hypocritical world, only Goog Enough is allowed to abuse SERPS with AI.
Rolling Stone has resorted to relying on partner content and random free-trial/discount-code articles. I mean, what does Rolling Stone know about “quarter zips for men,” “birthday gifts for him,” and free trial hacks? How does Google allow this?





















