The SEO industry may be entering another familiar cycle. This time, instead of companies buying backlinks to manipulate traditional search rankings, marketers are beginning to experiment with buying brand mentions intended to influence AI-generated responses in Google AI Overviews, Google AI Mode, ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, Gemini, and other large language model systems.
If that sounds familiar, it should.
For those of us who have been involved in SEO long enough, this has all the early warning signs of the paid link era all over again.
The tactics may be different. The technology may be different. The platforms may be different.
But the underlying behavior pattern is almost identical.
Google Is Already Warning About Artificial AI Mentions
At the Search Central Live Shanghai 2026 event on May 15th, Gary Illyes from Google reportedly warned against buying or manipulating brand mentions for the purpose of appearing in AI-generated answers and AI search experiences.
The comments surfaced publicly after Kenichi Suzuki posted about them on LinkedIn. According to Suzuki, the discussion happened shortly after a well-known AI software company began promoting tools designed to automate the process of buying mentions intended to influence AI systems such as Google AI Overviews, ChatGPT, Claude, and other platforms.
Suzuki summarized the comments from Gary Illyes and Cherry Sireetorn Prommawin by explaining that Google did not confirm whether normal organic mentions directly influence AI search visibility. However, they strongly warned against manipulative mention-building tactics.
Suzuki wrote:
“They strongly cautioned against buying or manipulating mentions, comparing the practice to paid links—which Google’s internal systems detect, disregard, and ultimately ignore.”
That comparison alone should immediately get the attention of experienced SEOs.
Google has already publicly documented its concerns about “inauthentic mentions” in its guidance related to generative AI optimization.
Google stated:
“Seeking inauthentic ‘mentions’: Just like the rest of Google Search, our generative AI features can show what’s being said about products and services across the web, including in blogs, videos, and forum discussions. However, seeking inauthentic ‘mentions’ across the web isn’t as helpful as it might seem. Our core ranking systems focus on high-quality content while other systems block spam; our generative AI features depend on both.”
That language matters.
When Google starts publicly warning against a manipulation tactic, history suggests they are already working on systems to detect it.
We Have Already Lived Through This With Paid Links
Back in the late 1990s and early 2000s, paid links were everywhere.
Companies openly bought links to improve rankings. Webmasters openly sold links. Entire marketplaces existed where links could be purchased by the month. Agencies built massive businesses around link acquisition campaigns designed primarily to manipulate Google’s algorithm.
I’ll even admit that I personally sold links on some of my own websites during that era.
At the time, the tactic worked extremely well.
Google’s ranking systems relied heavily on links as signals of authority and popularity. As a result, businesses discovered they could artificially influence rankings simply by purchasing enough links from enough websites.
And for a while, it worked.
Then Google started responding.
First came public warnings about link schemes. Then came manual penalties. Then came algorithmic crackdowns. Link networks began disappearing. Entire businesses built around paid links collapsed almost overnight.
Then Penguin launched.
When Google introduced the Penguin update, the impact across the SEO industry was massive. Websites with manipulative link profiles lost rankings overnight. Many businesses that had become overly dependent on paid links suddenly found themselves scrambling for recovery strategies.
Some sites never recovered.
The similarities between that period and what is happening today with AI mentions are difficult to ignore.
AI Mention Manipulation Is Already Becoming a Business Model
Right now, companies are already experimenting with systems designed to manufacture online mentions at scale.
Some are attempting to automate:
- Blog mentions
- Forum discussions
- Reddit references
- Social media conversations
- Podcast citations
- Press release amplification
- Video transcript mentions
- AI-generated reviews
- Contributor article placements
- Entity-based content injections
The goal is straightforward: influence what AI systems see, process, summarize, and recommend.
In many cases, the strategy appears to revolve around volume and repetition.
If a brand name appears consistently across enough online sources, some marketers believe those mentions may increase the probability that AI systems reference the brand within generated responses.
Whether that actually works consistently is still unclear.
But the important part is this: people clearly believe it works.
And whenever marketers believe something influences rankings or visibility, an industry quickly forms around selling it.
The Future “AI Mention Agency” Is Easy to Imagine
I can easily envision entire companies emerging that specialize specifically in AI visibility manipulation.
The service offerings would probably resemble old-school link building services from years ago, only with updated terminology built around AI systems and entity recognition.
Potential service names might include:
- AI Mention Building
- AI Visibility Optimization
- Generative Search Placement
- AI Entity Amplification
- Conversational Search Optimization
- AI Citation Campaigns
- LLM Brand Positioning
- AI Reputation Engineering
- AI Authority Signals
- AI Recommendation Optimization
The marketing language would likely sound extremely familiar to anyone who remembers the link building industry from the 2000s:
- “Get your brand mentioned across authoritative AI sources.”
- “Improve your visibility in Google AI Overviews.”
- “Increase your inclusion rate in ChatGPT answers.”
- “Boost your AI recommendation frequency.”
- “Build entity authority across generative search systems.”
- “Become part of the AI knowledge ecosystem.”
Some companies would probably package these services into monthly retainers based on the number of mentions generated, the authority of the domains involved, or the specific AI systems being targeted.
Others would likely automate the process entirely using AI-generated content combined with large-scale publishing systems.
Again, this sounds remarkably similar to the evolution of paid links.
Why Google Will Almost Certainly Respond Aggressively
The reality is that Google has spent more than two decades fighting manipulation.
The search engine already has extensive systems designed to identify:
- Link spam
- Coordinated publishing patterns
- Manipulative anchor text behavior
- Artificial authority signals
- Network-based amplification
- Spam-generated content
- Low-quality entity associations
Extending those systems into AI mention analysis is not a huge leap conceptually.
The underlying manipulation patterns remain similar even if the signals themselves evolve.
For example, Google could potentially identify:
- Abnormal mention velocity
- Repetitive co-occurrence patterns
- Artificial entity clustering
- Networks of coordinated brand references
- Low-quality mention ecosystems
- Programmatic conversational manipulation
- Synthetic reputation amplification
Those footprints are measurable.
And once manipulation becomes widespread enough, Google historically responds with stronger enforcement.
Manual Actions for AI Mention Spam May Eventually Happen
One possibility I could absolutely see happening is the introduction of manual actions specifically tied to manipulative AI mention campaigns.
At first, Google may simply ignore low-quality mentions algorithmically.
But over time, if abuse becomes widespread, manual penalties become increasingly likely.
Google has already demonstrated a willingness to penalize manipulative behavior involving:
- Paid links
- Structured data spam
- User-generated spam
- Thin affiliate content
- Expired domain abuse
- Scaled content abuse
- Site reputation abuse
Artificial AI mention manipulation fits naturally into that broader category of deceptive ranking behavior.
I would not be surprised at all if we eventually see:
- Manual actions tied to AI mention manipulation
- AI mention spam classifiers
- Algorithmic devaluation systems
- Entity trust scoring adjustments
- Mention quality evaluation systems
- Reputation authenticity analysis
At some point, Google may even combine these systems into a broader algorithm update similar to Penguin.
And when that eventually happens, companies relying heavily on purchased AI mentions could see dramatic losses in visibility.
The Risk May Actually Be Higher Than Paid Links
What makes this situation especially dangerous is that AI systems rely heavily on trust, context, and entity relationships.
Artificially manipulating those signals may create even stronger spam indicators than traditional paid links.
Unlike links, mentions can be easier to mass-produce using AI-generated content.
That means abuse could escalate very quickly.
And historically, the faster abuse spreads, the faster Google tends to respond.
This is why I suspect the enforcement cycle around AI mention manipulation may happen much faster than the years it took Google to fully address paid link abuse.
Digital PR Remains the Safest Long-Term Strategy
My recommendation is simple.
Stick with legitimate Digital PR.
The SEO industry has spent more than 20 years developing effective strategies centered around authentic visibility:
- Earned media coverage
- Industry interviews
- Original research studies
- Expert commentary
- Newsworthy announcements
- Podcast appearances
- Conference participation
- Authoritative publishing
- Thought leadership
- Real reputation building
Those strategies create legitimate visibility signals naturally.
And more importantly, they create durable trust.
If AI systems increasingly rely on evaluating reputation, expertise, authority, and online discussion, then authentic Digital PR likely becomes even more important over time.
Artificial shortcuts may work temporarily.
Real authority tends to last longer.
I Am Not Offering This Service
To be very clear, I have no plans to start an “AI mention” service or participate in selling manipulative AI visibility campaigns.
But I absolutely expect other companies to attempt it.
In fact, I suspect we are only in the very early stages of this becoming a recognizable industry segment.
The incentives are obvious.
As businesses become more focused on visibility inside AI-generated answers, marketers will naturally search for shortcuts and scalable influence tactics.
That is exactly what happened with traditional SEO.
And history usually repeats itself.
History Usually Repeats Itself in SEO
SEO has always experienced repeating cycles:
- A tactic appears
- The tactic works temporarily
- The tactic becomes popular
- The tactic becomes abused
- Google responds aggressively
- The tactic loses effectiveness
Paid links followed this cycle.
Article spinning followed this cycle.
Private blog networks followed this cycle.
Link exchanges followed this cycle.
Comment spam followed this cycle.
AI mention manipulation may very well become the next version of the same story.
The safest long-term strategy has always been the same:
Build real authority. Build real expertise. Build real relationships. Build real trust. Build real visibility.
Because eventually, manipulated shortcuts almost always get neutralized.
The only real uncertainty is how long it takes before Google fully responds.