People Also Ask SEO: How to optimize, rank and track

 

Capture long-tail traffic through People Also Ask results. See how to identify opportunities and build content that stands out.

As SERPs continue to change, we see more search features taking up space on Page 1. 

That’s why it’s increasingly important to gain visibility in People Also Ask results. 

Let’s go over some ways to research People Also Ask (PAA) rankings, and methods you can use in order to get a website ranking in them.

What is the People Also Ask box?

This accordioned box shows a list of questions related to the query that you searched. 

You can expand the accordions to find out more information and click through to different links. 

In some cases, AI Overviews results can appear within an expanded PAA box. See below:

So, if you have a shoe company but are having a hard time ranking on Page 1 for the query “types of shoes” (8,100 monthly search volume according to Semrush), you still have the opportunity to optimize a page for related queries and show up in the SERPs. 

Or, if you’re already in the top spot for the query but want to dominate that SERP as much as possible, you can also try to get another page ranked in the PAA box.

Looking at People Also Ask visibility using Semrush

Drill down into specific PAA rankings with Semrush’s SERP Features tool (or a comparable keyword tool).

Just pop your domain into Domain Overview, and navigate to Organic Research. From there, drill down in a few different ways:

• Where your domain ranks for People Also Ask results.
• Where People Also Ask results show up for a keyword your domain ranks for.
• Where PAAs are not on the SERPs.
• Where your domain doesn’t rank in the PAAs.

All of these views can be helpful in some way. 

Identifying where your site ranks but doesn’t appear in the PAA box lets you build a list of content and optimization opportunities to boost visibility.

---

Identifying opportunities to rank in People Also Ask results

This can get a little time-consuming, since the keyword that your site is ranking for in the PAA box is not the same keyword being shown in Semrush. (Remember, it’s a related question that people also ask). 

Dig into the different related questions by viewing the SERPs in Semrush. 

For example, Nike ranks well for the keyword “Jordan 4” but doesn’t rank in the PAA result on that SERP. 

If we view the SERP for that keyword…

…then we can see what questions are appearing. 

“How do I spot fake Air Jordans” and “What is the rarest J4” present good opportunities to create content that answers those questions directly on the Nike site.

Tackle these opportunities in a few ways:

• Drill down into the list of places your site is not yet ranking in the existing People Also Ask box.
  • Your site is already ranking in some capacity for these keywords, but you’re not in this result yet. 
  • That presents an opportunity to add a related answer to a question on the ranking page and potentially gain more organic visibility.
• Find out where your competitors are ranking in PAA results and where you don’t. 
  • This gives you a great opportunity to take a PAA result spot from a competitor or generate a new page idea based on their work. 
  • Be sure to look at multiple competitors to get a full picture of the content gaps on your site.

How can your site rank in more PAA results?

Short answer: Answer the questions that people also ask. 

From the research you pull, choose the related questions that are relevant to your brand, products and/or services. 

Then, create some informative, concise FAQs on relevant pages (or create new pages as needed). 

Quality and informative content that your site has the right to win for is going to perform best in these results. 

You’ll want to wrap the question headings in H2 or H3 tags and then include the answer as a small paragraph below. 

Remember:

• Provide accurate information.
• Keep it short.
• Use natural language.
• Back your answers with credible sources when that’s relevant.

Don’t forget about authority.

As a supporting tactic, you’ll want to ensure that Google sees your site and important pages as authoritative. 

Find natural ways to gain links from high domain authority sites, whether that’s from gaining news coverage or having a thought leader do an interview for a publication. 

Especially when creating a new page, you’ll want to try to gain some backlinks to it.

And ensure your internal linking profile is strong. Linking to pages where you’re answering PAA questions can help signal their importance to Google.

What should you avoid when optimizing for People Also Ask results?

Steer clear of these common mistakes to keep your content eligible and effective in PAA boxes:

• Keyword stuffing: Naturally answering the question is best, not inserting a ton of keywords and creating spammy-looking content
• Ignoring search intent: Shoehorning a keyword or answer into a page that isn’t really related to the question isn’t going to lead to good results.
• Writing an essay: Long-form content isn’t the way here. Keep it concise and directly answer the question.
• Forgetting to update content as needed: It’s a good habit to periodically check to ensure your answers are up to date.

Tracking People Also Ask results

Include your target PAA keywords in your rank tracking tool to see when you’ve won those spots.

In Semrush, check the SERP Features trend and filter for PAA results to track how many you rank for over time and spot any major changes.

Capturing visibility, authority, and traffic through PAA

The People Also Ask box is a powerful gateway to visibility, authority, and long-tail traffic. 

By delivering concise, intent-driven answers and tracking your performance, you can secure a lasting presence in these results and extend your brand’s reach beyond traditional rankings. 

As search evolves – and with AI and conversational queries on the rise – PAA results will only grow in importance. 

Make PAA optimization a core part of your strategy now by researching questions, structuring answers, and tracking your wins

AI Overview citations: Why they don’t drive clicks and what to do

 

Data from 20,000+ queries shows AI Overviews match Position 6 results – offering high visibility, but far fewer clicks than blue links.

Visibility in Google’s AI Overviews doesn’t equal traffic. 

In my research from the first half of this year, AI Overview citations consistently underperformed – even compared to traditional blue links near the bottom of the SERP.

An AI Overview citation can still help with authority, brand recall, positioning, and maybe even long-term LLM training. 

But for short-term clicks? The data paints a sobering picture.

How AI Overviews vs. blue links compare: What the data shows

Are AI Overview citations actually gathering clicks? Or are they just pushing the real click-producers further down the page? 

That question led me to look at the performance of classic blue links and AI Overviews across a dozen different industries. 

Inside the research

This analysis draws on more than 20,000 ranking queries across industries, including:

• Automotive repair.
• Ecommerce.
• Education.
• Fitness.
• Healthcare.
• Manufacturing.
• SaaS. 

From that pool, a focused case study examined 200+ unique SERPs from February to April 2025 where AI Overviews appeared. 

Using Google Search Console and Semrush, the study tracked:

• The position of each domain inside the Overview.
• The same domain’s position in the traditional blue links.
• CTR, impressions, and clicks.

To keep the analysis clean, I only counted the first appearance of a link in an AI Overview to avoid inflating performance with duplicates.

What the study found

• Ranking first in an AI Overview delivers roughly Position 6 clicks: Far from the golden ticket many assume.
• AI Overview CTR curves fall off a cliff – fast: By Position 5, most citations might as well be on the 10th page of Google’s search results.
• The Top 3 blue links still perform best: The strongest AI Overview slot doesn’t match the Top 3 organic SERP results. Blue links still dominate where it matters: driving real, high-intent traffic.

Dig deeper: Will Google’s AI Overviews kill the click?

So, why aren’t AI Overviews driving clicks?

The fact that the addition of AI Overview citations to SERPs is hurting clicks isn’t exactly breaking news.

Since AI Overviews have been implemented, they have been documented to hurt click-through rates across the SERP, particularly on informational queries.

But this shows that the answer isn’t as simple as shooting for AI Overview placements, assuming the new “top” overall SERP placement will compensate for lost clicks.

The problem is even stickier for AI Overviews.

Part of the issue is that user intent is becoming (even more) satisfied on-screen.

It’s the same, classic zero-click search problem that’s been ongoing since People also ask placements, with Google now synthesizing these answers for users.

But AI Overviews have even greater issues that minimize their value to content creators due to their unique placement, structure, and organization.

AI Overview brand mentions lack context

In a blue link, the brand is both a doorway and a marquee.

After all, a traditional blue link has an optimized title and an attention-grabbing meta description to attract that all-valuable click.

But in AI Overviews, brands are given a small, bland citation, with only a fraction of the meta description available. It’s basically a mousehole.

Position inflation

Being “first” in an Overview doesn’t carry the same weight as “first” in organic results. 

The top of SERPs is overly busy with AI Overviews, paid ads, site links, map packs, and other features. 

Data shows that search users agree: many searchers are scrolling down, looking for an escape from the clutter.

With AI Overviews, engagement swiftly drops off a cliff

Users scan several blue links, but attention collapses in AI Overviews. Citations are small, hard to scroll, and visually unappealing.

Other searchers clearly agree. The CTR curve shows a steep decay, so that by AI Overview citation 4 or 5, your link basically doesn’t exist.

What should SEOs do about it?

First, we need to reframe the way we present our data, our goals, and maybe even our service.

• Visibility ≠ traffic: If you’re reporting clicks to leadership, AI Overview citations will not save your dashboards. That’s why some SEOs are making the move to attribute other channel traffic to their efforts. (More on that, later.)
• SERP authority ≠ ROI: Yes, being cited in an AI Overview lends credibility and visibility. It may even eventually contribute to a click, down the line of a user’s search experience. But that credibility is more abstract than ever and more challenging to track.
• The battle for top blue link positions is far from over: You still need to fight for top blue link positions. AI Overviews haven’t “leveled the field” against any established top 3 ranking competitor content. They’ve just added another, weaker layer to the SERP.

---

Now, here’s where things actually get actionable.

1. Optimize for the overview, but don’t overvalue

AI Overview citations do matter. A top ranking here can match a decent organic result, but not a Top 3 slot.

I’ve found the most success in ranking for AI Overviews by treating them similarly to People also ask snippets, by focusing on “answer capsules.” 

Here’s what’s worked for me. 

• Start by identifying high-volume FAQs
  • Look for high-volume terms, using tools like Semrush’s Keyword Overview, and identify queries already displaying AI Overviews. 
  • Similar to traditional blue links, I’ve found keyword difficulty does matter for AI Overviews, but a highly difficult score is less of a hindrance. 
  • Low authority or new domains often still have a shot to rank highly in AI Overviews against established competitors. 
• Place tight, authoritative answer capsules after H2s or H3s
  • Treat an answer like a highly optimized meta description. 
  • Keep a summarized answer, or “answer capsule,” to less than 200 characters. 
  • A quick, confident, and summarized answer that can be easily cited is a must.
  • You’ll add more information below, fleshing out your answer to provide more in-depth information to users on your site. 
• Don’t externally link in your answer capsule
  • Don’t communicate to search engines that another resource is a better source on the topic. 
  • Never externally link in an area of copy you believe is a target for an AI Overview.

Other SEO best practices also apply. 

• Use structured markup where it makes sense. 
• Anticipate natural language queries. Read content like a user and answer their questions, even if they’re not high-volume keywords.
• Make content that makes sense for people, since search engines and LLMs care most about them.

2. Double down on Page 1 blue links

Top 3 rankings are still the primary click drivers. 

In-depth content, written for users who experience it on-page, is still the best strategy for dominating the top of Google’s blue links.

Search might have changed, but you should continue to prioritize optimizing for:

• Content depth: More informed and topically thorough posts produce longer engaged sessions, lower bounce rates, and drive more in-site traffic. That hasn’t changed. 
• Link authority: Backlinks still matter, for both AI Overviews and traditional blue links. 
• Technical health: Whether it’s blue links, AI Overviews, or other SERP features, your site needs to perform well. Keep an eye on those Core Web Vitals.

3. Consider tracking ‘assisted conversions’

Search has changed. Why wouldn’t we change the way we track how users search? 

When framing AI Overviews to stakeholders, it can be helpful to understand AI Overview mentions as an upper-funnel assist. 

They might not deliver the click now, but they prime users for later recognition.

But don’t go too far. 

I see some SEOs are making the move to attribute other channel traffic to their efforts. 

It makes sense, since visibility one day can lead to a variety of different channel traffic on another. 

After all, commercials and billboards work for a reason. 

Be skeptical of claims that AI Overview visibility drives large spikes in direct traffic.

While it would be lovely to claim credit for direct as an SEO, it seems odd to expect that organic users are really typing in specific URLs without a referral link or Google search. 

That said, I do think it’s reasonable to assume AI Overviews drive some gains to branded organic traffic. 

Increasingly, parsing out branded and non-branded traffic – a long-standing best practice for reporting – may not be painting as clear a picture as it used to. 

In other words, we need to think hard about what our domain’s user journeys really look like. We also need to present them to decision-makers in a way that makes sense, not just looks good for SEOs. 

4. Track CTR realistically

We have to stop benchmarking against outdated CTR expectations. 

For years, I’ve seen numbers as high as 40% expected CTR for a Position 1 overall ranking, and this really isn’t based on anything accurate anymore. 

Run a search, and you’ll find a number of these inflated estimates on SERPs (and now, AI Overviews!). 

It’s time we just throw these numbers out the window. Back up these estimates with real data. 

Educate stakeholders, so they don’t chase the wrong KPIs – and expect them from you.

Visibility isn’t a click, but it is valuable

AI Overviews are flashy and feel like a win, but they’re visibility – not a traffic engine. 

Measuring them as such misleads stakeholders.

For SEOs and digital marketers, the right playbook is clear:

• Keep authority building through links, technical health, content depth, and other traditional SEO best practices.
• Chase and defend top blue link positions. They’re moving the needle most.
• Treat AI Overview citations as upper-funnel brand moments, not the centerpiece of reporting.

In other words: don’t mistake this new gold star sticker for revenue. 

Celebrate the visibility, but keep KPIs anchored where the most clicks – and business impact – actually come from

The origins of SEO and what they mean for GEO and AIO

 

The story of how SEO got its name reveals why AI-era acronyms – AIO, GEO, AEO – face the same challenges of credit, clarity, and consensus.

The debate on SEO‘s changing practice and its transition to AI has heated up recently on podcasts, blogs, news sites, and social spaces around the web. 

While the discussion is focused on what we should call it and why – be it “GEO” (generative engine optimization), “AIO” (artificial intelligence optimization), or something else – one linguistic element keeps surfacing.

No matter the acronym, it will most likely include the word “optimization.” 

Most people debating the term likely do not know the details of its origins, as a similar debate about optimization occurred almost 30 years ago – before many of today’s debaters were even born.

While naming and debating the linguistics of this new thing may seem trivial at a high level, the fact is that the right time is now for the discussion to take place, just as the progenitors of SEO had these discussions back in 1995-1996.

Why optimization still matters

While AEO, AIO, and GEO are acronyms that have been bandied about a lot, many people seem to be vying to be “the one” to coin this new term. 

In the early days, there were literally tens of people doing SEO. 

As it progressed to hundreds, then thousands, it was still a small enough group where consensus could be reached.

Now, with millions engaged in the practice, don’t be surprised if current practitioners never agree. 

Many high-profile SEOs are now pushing into variations of GEO and AIO. 

Tim Sanders, Harvard fellow and SVP of AI evangelism at B2B directory G2, told me they had their own naming deliberation a couple of weeks ago, and they changed the G2 category listing from GEO to AEO.

But I would make the case that no matter what the new term ends up being named, if the moniker includes the word optimization in any form, then the credit goes to the original people who gave SEO its name.

The grammar problem with ‘optimization’

As practicing search marketers, we all know about the taxonomies and linguistics of keywords. 

The single word “optimization” in SEO identifies a stemmed property of a search engine, or in other words, “optimizing for” a search engine.

However, it is fair to say that the term still has a grammatical challenge, and this discussion around optimization for AI is not immune to the same problem.

Veteran search executive and pioneer Mike Grehan has posed the following question over and over at conferences and in columns and blog posts for more than 25 years: 

• “How does one optimize a search engine? You can’t.”

He’s right – when construed that way, the term SEO does not make grammatical sense. 

I have posited to him a few times that it can also be “optimizing for,” as the original creators intended. 

But the new naming risks the same grammatical issue with GEO and AIO.

---

Who coined SEO?

Back around 1995–1997, five people came to the “optimization” realization at the same time, though each was unknown to the others. 

Bruce Clay invented the term and has been SERP-famous for ranking first in Google for “search engine optimization” for over a decade.

John Audette and Bob Heyman (and his business partner Leland Harden) are also credited with coining the term, though their names are not included in the Wikipedia entry for search engine optimization.

Danny Sullivan should also get credit for helping popularize the term through his extensive search engine news coverage at Search Engine Watch and Search Engine Land. 

And in my interview with Heyman for this article, one other new name came up: Viktor Grant.

None of the people mentioned thus far has ever disputed – either in person or in print – that the others did not independently come up with the phrase. 

I spoke with four of the five for this article, and none of them disputes the others’ epiphanies as copies.

In my interview with Heyman and Grant, they also stressed that Stephen Mahaney of SearchEngineNews.com and Planet Ocean made key contributions in popularizing SEO, and it is true that he has largely been uncredited up to now. 

Grant also prefers to be known as a pioneer in black hat SEO, before it even had a name, as he was doing IP/agent targeting – later referred to as cloaking, among other names.

Clay said his use of SEO came from his previous work in Silicon Valley doing mainframe optimization. 

“Optimization” was already embedded in his mind when it came time to give this new concept a name. 

Speaking on the various new terms, Clay joked:

• “I have started to use the Old McDonald framework where it’s E, I, E, I, O.” 

But seriously, he continued:

• “The fact is, anything can be an engine, but technically, there’s nobody there saying it’s only organic. Technically, pay-per-click is SEO. But when you look at SEO, I think we as an industry have accepted that it’s on-page, off-page. And when you think about off-page and think about linking, those are practice areas within SEO. That is where GEO belongs, AEO belongs. Those are specialties within SEO under the umbrella of SEO.”

Heyman and Grant are proponents of the term GEO, and their opinions should carry significant weight in the overall conversation. 

Heyman said:

• “In terms of a marketing world… influencers have adopted it, so I think it’s going to catch on. And also because it plays off ‘SEO,’ [which] people are used to.”

The naming of SEO took much deliberation, as they were trying to solve a navigation issue with the build of a website for the band Jefferson Starship. 

Regarding the genesis of the practice, Grant said:

• “The concept of the 3 a.m. call from the Jefferson Starship manager is really the thing that cemented it. And it’s like, what do we call it? And Heyman looked at him and said, ‘search engine optimization.’”

For Jefferson Starship, no gaming of the system was involved. 

The fact is that the search engines of that time could not find the official band website for exact searches of their name. 

And those who were solely concerned with search issues at that time likely numbered in the hundreds or low thousands, as opposed to now, when millions participate or lurk in the conversations.

How SEO spread

Those early deliberations are also notable because optimization wasn’t exactly a slam-dunk term at the time. 

Frederick Marckini, founder of the first SEO-only agency iProspect (disclosure: I was a previous employee at this company), wrote a massive tech book in 1999 titled “Search Engine Positioning,” which was effectively the first major print book on SEO. 

Grehan also wrote one of the most significant books on the topic at that time.

For whatever reason, “positioning” didn’t stick, though it was a valid candidate.

If it had, how would the terms generative engine positioning and artificial intelligence positioning sound to you? 

Probably the same way AIO and GEO sound to me.

From GEO to today: Why names don’t stick

Here’s another issue with GEO. 

I’ve been talking about AI in one form or another for over 25 years.

Not once in my experience has anyone ever called an AI or LLM a generative engine. 

In that sense, it is largely a made-up phrase. 

What do we typically call it? 

• An LLM. 
• AI. 
• GPT. 
• A search engine. 

But never “generative engine.” 

For some reason, LLMO and GPTO just don’t seem to have the same ring to them.

Lastly, aside from the obvious semantic log-splitting of the term GEO related to geography in search marketing and everywhere else on the planet, there is another big issue with GEO. 

It paves over one of the biggest advantages of AI to businesses: agentic workflow and autonomous delivery – an element just as important to future success as being visible and found.

LLMs are like black magic for anyone who has ever written content on their own, or created art, images, video, in-depth research, or code on their own. 

Similarly, one of their most important uses is automation for a multitude of tasks in the search business. 

If you are still using LLMs but are still copy-pasting a lot, you are missing out on some of the main benefits and imperatives of AI in the modern world. 

GEO says nothing to address this key element.

I personally don’t think any one term will stick in the not-so-distant future. 

We are all in our own algorithmic filter bubbles, and we are all too tribal. 

Be aware that the different terms all have the same intention, and either correct or roll with it accordingly.

We may each end up speaking a different language, but the meaning is still the same.

YouTube to reinstate banned channels: What it means for advertisers

 

The return of banned YouTube creators could reshape ad reach and placements – and pose risks for brands and marketers.

YouTube will reinstate channels previously banned under old COVID-19 and election integrity rules, a major shift in the platform’s approach to content moderation.

Driving the news. Channels terminated for repeated violations of policies that are “no longer in effect” will be allowed back, YouTube’s parent company, Alphabet, told Congress in a letter.

• Alphabet acknowledged it had faced outside pressure to remove user content but said it will now prioritize “free expression.”
• YouTube will replace some fact-checking mechanisms with context notes, letting users add clarifications – a tool X already uses.

What it means. Reinstated channels will be eligible to serve ads again. That means more inventory – but also potential brand-safety concerns, depending on how advertisers view these channels.

• The policy shift could expand reach opportunities on YouTube, but may require closer monitoring of placements to avoid adjacency with controversial content.
• Suspended creators gain a path back, which could reshape competition for views and ad dollars.

Why we care. Chris Cabaniss, co-founder of Falcon Digital Marketing, put it this way in a LinkedIn post: “No matter which side you’re on, or your personal political beliefs, this could have a major impact of many new (or reinstated) channels coming back to YouTube and serving ads again. For you or your client, these may be channels you DO want to show ads on, or DO NOT want to show ads on. Either way, it is big news and it will be interesting to see how this plays out.”

The press release. Google Admits Censorship Under Biden; Promises to End Bans of YouTube Accounts of Thousands of Americans Censored for Political Speech

The statement. Alphabet’s letter (PDF)

More coverage. See Techmeme.

Google tests Brand Profiles in Merchant Center Next

 

Google is testing Brand Profiles in Merchant Center Next, giving retailers new ways to showcase their story, values, and offers directly in Search.

Google is piloting Brand Profiles in Merchant Center Next, giving retailers a fresh way to showcase their story, values, and promotions directly in Search results.

Why we care. With shopping searches increasingly crowded, Brand Profiles give merchants a chance to differentiate beyond product listings, potentially influencing purchase decisions earlier in the journey.

How it works:

• Appears in the Merchant Center Next “Brand” section, though currently locked from editing.
• Lets merchants highlight brand values, categories, and business descriptions.
• Supports images, videos, and offers to enrich product visibility.
• Provides insights into how customers interact with brand content.

The catch. Access to Brand Profiles is limited to select accounts in early testing, with editing rights reserved for super admins. Google plans to expand eligibility and notify accounts as they’re added.

Zoom out. First teased at Google Marketing Live 2025, Brand Profiles underline Google’s push to make Search more immersive and brand-driven, competing with retail media networks that already spotlight brand storytelling.

What’s next. As availability widens, merchants will want to test how Brand Profiles influence click-through rates, conversions, and shopper perception.

First seen. This notification was first spotted by Muiz Hassan, Google Ads manager at Marketaspex

Google clarifies API key process for local inventory feeds

Google simplified the process for merchants to obtain API keys for local inventory feeds, clearing a hurdle to faster Shopping integration.

After months of merchant frustration over securing the required API key for website-reported local inventory feeds via Google Tag Manager, Google has now confirmed a straightforward process:

• Complete setup.
• Request validation through a form.
• Once approved, a Google agent provides the API key.

Why we care. This clarification makes it easier for merchants to implement local inventory feeds, stay compliant with Google’s policies, and bring in-store availability data into their Shopping presence faster.

What’s next. With this streamlined process, merchants can expect smoother onboarding and more reliable integration of local inventory into their campaigns.