Site Reputation Abuse: how Google's policy works
Google is tightening enforcement of its Site Reputation Abuse policy. The policy was introduced in 2024, and throughout 2025–2026 Google has begun applying it significantly more aggressively.
In this article, we explain what Site Reputation Abuse is, which cases Google classifies as abuse of the feature, and what risks this creates for affiliates.
What Is Site Reputation Abuse
Google introduced the Site Reputation Abuse policy in March 2024 alongside algorithm updates and new anti-spam rules. It targets cases where third-party content is placed on a site in order to exploit its search reputation.
A simple example: there's a resource called finance.com that has been publishing articles about banks, investments, and loans for 10 years, accumulating a high DR and Google's trust. If a third-party partner arranges to open a finance.com/casino/ section with slot reviews there, those pages can easily rank at the top of search results by leveraging someone else's authority. That is Site Reputation Abuse.
This is one form of parasite SEO. Instead of developing their own resource, content is promoted through someone else's already-authoritative site. We covered this model in more detail in a previous article.
The mere fact of placing ads or affiliate content is not a violation: an affiliate review of a fintech service or a new credit card on that same finance.com would raise no red flags. But the moment an off-topic third-party business is "plugged into" a niche domain purely for easy search rankings, those pages become subject to sanctions.
The Key Change in 2025–2026
In May 2024, Google began applying the first sanctions for Site Reputation Abuse. Manual actions were taken against sites that were using their own search reputation to promote third-party content.
In November of the same year, Google clarified the rules: a formal editorial review of content no longer provides protection from sanctions if the material is published solely to leverage another domain's authority. Previously, editorial review was considered sufficient protection against sanctions.
Throughout 2025–2026, cases began to emerge of commercial sections on major sites losing rankings without any manual actions appearing in Search Console. At the same time, Google has not officially confirmed full automation of this policy.
Notably, the rules do not necessarily affect an entire site. The main domain may continue to rank while a specific affiliate directory or commercial section loses visibility.
The Cointelegraph Case
One of the most widely discussed cases is Cointelegraph. In early October 2025, the crypto media outlet's search visibility dropped sharply. According to Ahrefs, organic traffic fell by 98%; according to Semrush — by 65%. Both tools place the start of the decline at around October 6.
Cointelegraph organic traffic dynamics according to Ahrefs
Cointelegraph organic traffic dynamics in the US according to Semrush
During that same period, the site had an active iGaming section featuring casino content, and it was between October 7 and 12 that those pages began to be removed.
The homepage of Cointelegraph's iGaming section in the Wayback Machine archive as of October 12, 2025
Given this overlap in timing, the situation has been linked to Site Reputation Abuse. Analysts suggest that the iGaming content may have been ranking on the back of the crypto outlet's authority. Neither Google nor Cointelegraph has officially commented on the situation, so this connection remains speculative.
The scale of the problem goes beyond a single case: according to Semrush data, over 60% of penalized sites hosted partner or affiliate content specifically within subdirectories.
What this means for affiliates
Affiliates frequently publish content on authoritative platforms to get a quick start. This helps pages rank faster without the lengthy process of building their own site.
However, if the topic doesn't align with the donor site's core niche, a separate category or subdomain won't protect against ranking drops. Google is quick to detect attempts to rank purely on borrowed trust. In this situation, the safer move is to shift focus toward owned projects, while regularly monitoring any pages already placed on third-party sites for indexation and actual rankings.
Google doesn't penalize sites simply for hosting affiliate content on a third-party resource. Filters kick in when leveraging someone else's reputation becomes the primary reason for the publication.
Conclusion
Google is gradually tightening its control over the use of authoritative domains to promote third-party commercial content, and this policy is having an increasingly tangible impact on how affiliate sections operate.
For affiliates, this means that sustainable SEO needs to be built around an owned domain and an owned search reputation — not a dependency on someone else's authority.
