Fake author profiles are now fraud, not "E-E-A-T optimization"

The industry responded to E-E-A-T by inventing authors: stock (or AI) photos, generic bios, vague credentials. Google responded in writing. Section 4.5.3 of the Search Quality Rater Guidelines now lists, by name, as deceptive information about the website or content creators:

• Sites with “fake” owner or content creator profiles — “AI generated content with made up ‘author’ profiles (AI generated images or deceptive creator descriptions) in order to make it appear that the content is written by people.”
• False or inflated credentials — “an author or creator profile inaccurately claims to have credentials or expertise (e.g. the content creator claims falsely to be a medical professional) to make the content appear more trustworthy than it is.”

Category: deception. Rating: Lowest — the same as scams and phishing. And section 4.5’s aggravator: the rater needs no proof; strong suspicion is enough.

The detail most content operations miss: even mild exaggeration has a score. Section 5.6 orders a Low rating when credentials seem inflated “just to impress” — E-E-A-T is assessed from the content, external reputation and verifiable credentials, never from a self-declared “I’m an expert!”

The two defensible options: a real author with verifiable credentials, or no author at all. The third option became a liability with its own name in the manual.

Full analysis in the annotated guide: Lowest: untrustworthy pages and spam.