The June 2026 spam update rolled out in about two days, which is unusually fast, and hit harder than the speed suggested. Sites that lost visibility to it are now several weeks into trying to work out why.
A large proportion of them are doing the wrong thing, because the instinct when rankings collapse is to blame links. This update does not touch links. Every hour spent on a disavow file is an hour not spent on the thing that actually caused it.
What It Targeted
Google did not publish a list of specific tactics, which is normal for spam updates and unhelpful for everyone affected. What is known is more useful than it first appears.
The update enforced existing spam policies rather than introducing new ones. Nothing became a violation in June that was not a violation in May, the systems simply got better at catching it.
Critically, reporting on the rollout established that it did not target link spam and did not target site reputation abuse. Those are the two categories most people assume first, and both are ruled out.
That leaves content. The violations in scope are the content-level ones: scaled low-value content, cloaking and hidden text, keyword stuffing, and the general category of pages made to game search rather than to be read.
Were You Actually Hit?
Before diagnosing, confirm it was this update at all. Three checks:
- Timing. Did the drop start within the rollout window, and did it happen over roughly two days rather than gradually? A slow slide over six weeks is decay, not a spam action.
- Shape. Spam demotions tend to hit sitewide or hit a whole section, sharply. A handful of pages drifting down three positions is ordinary volatility.
- Manual actions. Check Search Console. A manual action is a different problem with a different fix: it requires a reconsideration request, which algorithmic demotions do not.
If the timing does not line up, stop here and look elsewhere. A great deal of wasted recovery work goes into fixing sites that were never penalised.
The Audit Worth Doing
Assuming it was this update, work through the content-level policies specifically.
Check | What you are looking for |
|---|---|
Scaled content | Large volumes of pages produced quickly with little unique value. Generated variations, spun text, thin location or comparison pages built to catch a tail. |
Hidden text and links | Text set to zero font size, colour-matched to the background, or positioned off-screen. Frequently injected by a compromise rather than added deliberately. |
Keyword stuffing | Repeated phrases in body copy, alt text, footers or hidden divs. Look at footers particularly, they age badly and nobody reads them. |
Doorway pages | Near-identical pages differing only by location or variant, all funnelling to the same destination. |
Expired domain abuse | Content unrelated to a domain’s original purpose, common after acquisitions. |
The hidden text row deserves a note. It is the violation most often present without the owner’s knowledge, because it is a standard payload of site compromises, injected links styled to be invisible to readers while remaining fully crawlable. The site owner sees nothing wrong on the page.
If you have never checked, view the rendered source of your highest-traffic pages and search for zero font sizes, off-screen positioning, and anchor text that has nothing to do with your business. It takes ten minutes. Finding something means you have both a spam problem and a security problem, and the second one is more urgent.
What Will Not Help
Worth being blunt, because these consume the most effort and produce the least.
- Disavowing backlinks. The update does not target link spam. A disavow file changes nothing here, and an aggressive one can remove links that were helping you.
- Publishing more content. If the demotion relates to scaled low-value content, adding to the pile makes the signal stronger, not weaker.
- Technical tinkering. Core Web Vitals, schema and internal linking are all worth doing and none of them address a spam policy violation.
- Waiting. Algorithmic spam demotions do not lapse. They reverse when the violation is gone and the systems reassess.
What Recovery Actually Looks Like
Two realities to set expectations against.
It is reversible. Content-level demotions lift when the violations are genuinely removed. This is not a permanent mark, and no reconsideration request is needed for an algorithmic action.
It is slow. Several months is normal, even when the fixes are fast and thorough. Google’s systems have to recrawl, reassess and re-evaluate the site as a whole. There is no way to accelerate this and no button to press.
That gap between fixing and recovering is where most sites fail. They remove the violation, see nothing for six weeks, conclude the diagnosis was wrong, and start changing other things: which makes it impossible to attribute the eventual recovery to anything, and often reintroduces problems.
Fix it properly once, document what you changed and when, then leave it alone and monitor.
Removing, Not Improving
One decision people get wrong repeatedly.
When the problem is a large volume of low-value pages, the fix is usually deletion, not improvement. Rewriting four thousand thin pages is not a project anyone completes. Removing them, or consolidating them into a much smaller set of genuinely useful pages, is.
Keep what earns its place. Redirect what has a sensible destination. Let the rest return 410. A smaller site that is entirely worth indexing outperforms a large one carrying dead weight, and that has been true long before this update.
Lost visibility in June and not sure why?
I will check whether the timing and shape actually match this update before you spend three months fixing the wrong thing.
📞 Book a free 20-minute review, or see full website SEO.
Serving all 50 US states, remote. ✉ info@shazzseo.com
Written by Shahzaib Ul Hassan, senior AI SEO consultant and founder of ShazzSEO. Ranking sites since 2009. 500+ websites optimized, 3,000+ students trained.
If you are convinced somebody is pointing junk at you deliberately, it is worth checking properly before acting. Usually nothing is happening, which is what a negative SEO assessment is meant to establish.