Google just published their official guide to optimizing for AI search. We read it. Some of it is genuinely useful. Some of it, taken at face value, will lead Canadian nonprofits to underinvest in things that are actually working.
Here is our honest read.
Where Google is right
The main point of the guide is correct. Google AI Overviews pull from Google's index. AI Mode pulls from Google's index. If you don't rank in Google, you don't show up in Google's AI answers. Same foundation, same rules.
They're also right that content quality is what actually moves the needle. Their framing is good: commodity content is anything an AI could have written. Non-commodity content is the thing only you could write — your specific client situations, your first-hand experience, your opinion that comes from actually doing the work. AI is getting very good at producing the former. The latter is what survives.
And yes, you don't need an llms.txt file. You don't need to chop your pages into robotic chunks. You don't need to stuff keyword variations into every paragraph. None of that helps on Google.
Where we disagree
The guide says to avoid overfocusing on structured data. Google's exact words: it's not required for generative AI search.
Technically true for Google. Not the full picture.
Schema does three things: it helps Google understand your site, it helps ChatGPT and Perplexity understand your site, and it earns you rich results in traditional Google search that improve click-through rates right now. There is no version of this where properly implemented schema hurts you. Calling it something to deprioritize is, in our view, the wrong call for any organization that cares about visibility beyond Google's ecosystem.
We have actual data on this. Bing Webmaster Tools now shows Pragmatica's Copilot citation data. In the past 7 days: 62 citations. The page driving the majority of those has FAQPage schema. Not a coincidence.
The guide also warns against seeking inauthentic mentions. Agreed completely — paying for fake citations is spam. But getting listed on CharityVillage, Imagine Canada, Clutch, or your sector's industry association is not inauthentic. It's how you build the external presence that tells Copilot and Perplexity your organization is real. Google's guide doesn't cover that because Google's guide is about Google.
The platform problem
That's the real issue with the guide. It's a Google document. It's not trying to help you show up on Perplexity or in ChatGPT responses. Those platforms use different signals. They respond to structured data. They respond to content that directly answers specific questions. They respond to consistent information across credible external sources.
A Canadian nonprofit that follows Google's guide to the letter could be well-optimized for Google AI Overviews and completely invisible on the tools that funders, procurement officers, and major donors are using to research organizations before picking up the phone.
That gap is real. The guide doesn't address it.
What we actually tell clients
Nothing in Google's guide contradicts what we do. We start with the technical foundation. Fast site, clean architecture, indexed properly. Then content that only that organization could write. Then schema on the important pages — Organization, LocalBusiness, FAQPage. Then credible Canadian directory listings. Then keeping content current when the world changes.
Google's guide covers the first two. We cover all five. That's the difference.
If you want to know where your organization actually stands across all of them, see what our AEO audit covers or get in touch.
