Google is trying to put a stake through the latest SEO superstition: carving articles into tiny chunks so large language models (LLMs) will like them more.
On a new episode of Google’s Search Off the Record podcast, search liaison Danny Sullivan and Search team veteran John Mueller warn publishers that “bite-sized” content tailored for LLMs like Gemini is a bad bet if you care about long‑term rankings.
The rise of LLM-friendly "content chunking"
You’ve probably seen it already:
- One– or two‑sentence paragraphs running down the page.
- Endless subheads phrased like chatbot prompts.
- Sections sliced so thin they barely say anything.
The logic behind this “content chunking” trend: if information is split into smaller blocks, LLMs will ingest and cite it more easily, which should (theoretically) boost visibility in AI answers and maybe search.
Sullivan says that logic is wrong.
“One of the things I keep seeing over and over in some of the advice and guidance and people are trying to figure out what do we do with the LLMs or whatever, is that turn your content into bite-sized chunks, because LLMs like things that are really bite size, right?” said Sullivan. “So… we don’t want you to do that.”
According to Sullivan, Google’s ranking systems are not looking for this pattern and don’t reward it.
Google’s actual signal: humans, not robots
Sullivan says he checked with Google engineers before going public with this guidance. The result won’t surprise anyone who’s listened to Google’s SEO messaging for the last decade: the best long‑term strategy is still writing for people, not machines.
Why? Because human behavior is itself a powerful ranking signal. What people click, what they stay on, what they bounce from—those choices shape how Google evaluates pages.
If you redesign your site around what you think Gemini or other LLMs want, you risk alienating the only audience that really matters to Google’s systems: actual users.
Why “chunking” can feel like it works
Part of the problem is that SEO advice fills the vacuum Google leaves. The company gives only broad guidelines, so consultants try to reverse‑engineer the algorithm from the outside, then share whatever seems to move the needle.
Layer on top of that a chaotic traffic environment—AI overviews, shifting referral patterns, social platform volatility—and you get publishers desperate for any edge. When things are unstable, almost any change can appear to “work” for a while.
Sullivan calls that out as a trap. A new tactic like content chunking might line up with some temporary quirk in how Google or an LLM surfaces information. That’s not the same as being a durable ranking factor.
He also acknowledges there can be “edge cases” where chunked content seems to perform:
“Great. That’s what’s happening now, but tomorrow the systems may change,” he said.
That’s the risk. If you’ve contorted your entire content strategy around today’s quirk, you’re exposed the moment systems improve.
Short-term hacks vs. long-term SEO
Sullivan’s real target isn’t just content chunking. It’s a mindset.
He describes publishers doing things “specifically for a ranking system, not for a human being,” and warns that as ranking systems evolve “to reward content written for humans,” all the micro‑optimizations you did to please an LLM “may not carry through for the long term.”
That’s the recurring arc of SEO:
- A new pattern is spotted.
- It gets turned into a formulaic “best practice.”
- Google updates its systems.
- Sites that over‑optimized around the fad get burned.
Chunking is simply the 2026 flavor of this cycle, fueled by anxiety over AI.
What publishers should actually do
The guidance coming out of Google’s own podcast is blunt:
- Don’t reformat articles into ultra‑short, robotic “bites” just for LLMs.
- Don’t expect Google Search to reward that pattern in rankings.
- Do keep focusing on clear, helpful, readable content for humans.
If breaking up big walls of text makes your article easier for people to scan, do it. If it makes your content feel disjointed, repetitive, or shallow, you’re helping neither readers nor rankings—no matter what the latest SEO thread on X or LinkedIn claims.
Google’s message is that its systems will keep evolving to detect and reward content that serves users first. Anyone chasing AI‑era gimmicks like extreme content chunking is, once again, betting against that direction.
