Google's December 2025 Core Update, which rolled out between December 11 and 29, sent ripples through search rankings for service businesses, particularly in law, healthcare and finance.
The update took 18 days to complete, one of the longer deployments in 2025, and caused SERP volatility to spike to 8.7/10, with significant ranking shifts across most industries.
Here's what actually changed, how it's affecting Australian service businesses and what you should do about it.
The Core Shift: Experience Matters More Than Ever
The biggest change in this update is that Google significantly elevated the 'Experience' component of E-E-A-T, forcing a shift in how search engine optimisation (SEO) is executed for service businesses.
E-E-A-T stands for Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness and Trustworthiness, and it’s the framework Google uses to evaluate content quality. While all four have always mattered, this update weighted on ‘Experience’ much more heavily than before.
This means Google's systems now actively look for signals that content creators have actually done, used, visited, tested, or directly interacted with their subject matter. It's no longer sufficient to write well-researched content about a topic. Google wants evidence that you've lived it.
For service businesses like law firms, this is actually an advantage, but only if you implement it correctly.
What We're Seeing With Clients
The service businesses we work with that already had strong E-E-A-T signals in place saw neutral-to-positive impacts from this update. Those without proper author credentials, first-person experience and clear expertise signals faced ranking challenges.
Specifically, we've been pushing clients towards:
- Clear author identification on all articles (with credentials)
- WordPress plugins that properly mark up author information for search engines
- First-person language and real case insights (anonymised where necessary)
- Unique data and perspectives not found elsewhere
Clients who implemented these elements over the past year came through the update unscathed, but those still relying on generic content saw traffic dips.
We're now working through content updates for clients who don't have proper E-E-A-T implementation, prioritising high-traffic pages first.
The Challenge: Getting Lawyer Buy-In
This is where it gets tricky for law firms. Google wants the person listed as the author or fact-checker to have relevant credentials, such as a lawyer for legal content, a doctor for medical content and a financial adviser for financial content.
Listing someone from the marketing team as the author (even if they did extensive research) doesn't cut it anymore.
This requires buy-in from solicitors and partners. They need to either:
- Be listed as the author and provide input/review
- Be listed as the fact-checker/reviewer with their credentials displayed
The issue we've encountered is getting timely responses from busy lawyers. Content gets written, edited and is ready to publish, then sits waiting for a partner to review and approve being listed as an author or fact-checker.
For firms where lawyers trust the content team and are comfortable being associated with the articles, this is a competitive advantage. However, for firms where lawyers are hesitant or unresponsive, it creates a backlog.
We recommend building relationships and processes that make this easy. Show lawyers the content in advance, explain that they're reviewing it for accuracy (not rewriting) and make it clear how author credibility helps the firm's visibility.
What ‘First-Person Experience’ Actually Looks Like
The algorithms evaluate the specificity and detail level that only genuine experience produces. This goes far beyond simply writing in first person or claiming experience.
Google looks for:
- Language patterns: “In our practice, we've found…”, “When representing clients in this situation…”, “The most common question we hear…”
- Specificity markers: Exact processes, unique details and proprietary insights that come from doing the work
- Visual evidence: Original photos (courtroom experiences, office consultations, real examples)
- Citation patterns: Referencing specific cases, legislation or precedents the author has worked with
Example of generic content that doesn’t work:
“Family law matters can be complex and emotional. It's important to choose an experienced lawyer who understands the intricacies of family law and can guide you through the process.”
Example of experience-driven content that works:
"In the 15 years I've practised family law in Melbourne, the most common mistake I see is couples trying to finalise property settlements before understanding their superannuation entitlements. Last month alone, three clients came to us after signing agreements that left six-figure super balances unaddressed, an error that's difficult and expensive to reverse. Here's what you need to know before any property discussion begins..."
The second example demonstrates real experience through specificity, timeframe, location and actual client patterns. You can't write that without having done the work.
This is Richard Greenwood, Director at Leadtree Marketing, and this insight comes directly from working with dozens of Australian law firms over the past several years, exactly the kind of first-person, specific experience Google now rewards.
The Low-Quality AI Content Purge
Sites that published large volumes of low-quality AI or generic content saw negative results, particularly in sectors where E-E-A-T matters most.
To be clear, this isn't about AI-assisted content. It's about thin, generic content that doesn't add value, whether that came from ChatGPT or lazy human writers.
The pattern we've seen punished:
- Articles that could have been written by anyone, about anything
- No unique insights or data
- No author credentials
- Generic advice available on dozens of other sites
- Content that reads like it was written to hit keyword targets rather than help readers
If your content strategy over the past year was ‘pump out lots of articles using basic ChatGPT prompts,’ this update likely hurt you.
If your strategy was ‘AI helps with research and drafting, humans add expertise and unique insights, lawyers review and approve,’ you're probably fine.
What We're Doing Differently
In response to this update and the broader trend it represents, we've adjusted our content approach for clients:
1. Doubling Down on Author Credibility
Every article now includes:
- Clear author byline with full name and credentials
- Author bio with relevant experience and qualifications
- Structured data (schema markup) telling Google exactly who wrote it
- Links to the author's professional profiles and credentials
For firms with multiple lawyers, we match content to the right author. The family law article is authored by the family law specialist, not the conveyancing partner.
2. Adding First-Person Experience and Unique Data
We're actively looking for ways to incorporate:
- Client patterns: "The most common question we're asked about is X..." or "In Y% of cases we handle..."
- Jurisdiction-specific insights: "In Victoria, [specific process]..." or "Melbourne courts typically..."
- Firm-specific data: If a firm tracks internal metrics (consultation-to-client conversion rates, average matter duration, etc.), we find ways to reference this
- Real examples: Anonymised case scenarios that illustrate points
This requires more input from lawyers than previous content workflows, but the result is that content competitors can't replicate it.
3. Seeking Unique Angles and Original Research
Google favours content that demonstrates something new rather than rehashing what exists elsewhere.
For service businesses, original research doesn't require academic studies. It can be:
- Surveying your clients about their experiences or concerns
- Analysing your own case data for patterns
- Interviewing experts in complementary fields
- Documenting processes specific to your firm or jurisdiction
Even small-scale original insights (50 client responses, analysis of your firm's past 100 matters) are valuable if the insights are genuine and useful.
What We're Watching Next
This update is part of a broader, multi-year shift in how Google evaluates content.
The question we're tracking: Is this a permanent move towards prioritising genuine expertise over SEO-optimised content?
For years, Google has said "write for users, not search engines." But in practice, optimised content without genuine expertise often outranked genuinely expert content that wasn't SEO-savvy.
The December 2025 update, combined with AI Overviews prioritising authoritative sources and previous 2024-2025 updates, suggests Google is finally getting better at distinguishing between ‘optimised for rankings’ and ‘genuinely expert.’
If this trend continues, it's positive for service businesses with real expertise. The playing field tilts back toward professionals who know their field and away from content farms and SEO manipulators.
But technical SEO still matters. The best content in the world won't rank if your site is slow, poorly structured or technically broken.
What's Overhyped vs What's Real
Overhyped: "Helpful content is all that matters now."
While content quality is more important than before, technical SEO, site speed, mobile optimisation and proper schema markup remain critical. You can't rank with great content on a technically broken site.
Real: Content quality has become a bigger differentiator.
Generic, anyone-could-have-written-this content struggles to rank, even if it’s technically perfect. Author credentials, experience demonstration and unique insights now significantly impact rankings.
Overhyped: "AI content is penalised."
Google doesn't penalise AI-assisted content. It penalises low-quality content, AI-generated or otherwise. Plenty of AI-assisted content ranks well if it's high-quality and demonstrates genuine value.
Real: Generic, thin content saw significant ranking losses.
If your content adds nothing new, demonstrates no expertise and could exist on any competitor's site with the business name swapped out, it's unlikely to rank well.
What to Do If Your Rankings Dropped
If you saw traffic declines in late December 2025 or early January 2026, here's the priority action list:
1. Audit Your Author Information
Do your articles have clear authors with credentials? Is this information visible to both readers and search engines (via schema markup)?
If not, add author bylines, bios and structured data to your highest-traffic pages first.
2. Assess Content for Generic vs Specific
Read your top-performing articles and honestly ask yourself whether this could exist on any other competitor’s site. It needs to demonstrate real experience and expertise.
If it's generic, either enhance it with specific insights, first-person experience, and unique data, or consider whether it's worth keeping.
3. Review for First-Person Experience Signals
Look for language that demonstrates actual expertise: "In our practice..." "When we handle these cases..." "The pattern we've observed..."
If your content reads like a textbook rather than advice from a practitioner, rewrite it to include more experience-based insights.
4. Check Technical SEO Fundamentals
Ensure:
- Schema markup for articles, authors and organisation
- Mobile speed and Core Web Vitals passing
- Clear site structure and navigation
- No broken links or technical errors
Content quality won't save you if technical foundations are broken.
5. Plan for Ongoing Content Enhancement
Don't treat this as a one-time fix. Build processes for:
- Getting lawyer input and review
- Adding first-person insights to all content
- Seeking unique angles and data
- Regularly updating older content to maintain freshness
The Bigger Picture
Google has been trying to reward genuine expertise over gaming the system for years. This update brings them closer to that goal.
For Australian service businesses, law firms, medical practices, financial advisers and aged care providers, this should be good news. You have the expertise and experience. You just need to ensure your content demonstrates it clearly.
The firms that win in 2026 SEO will be those that stop thinking of content as ‘marketing collateral’ and start thinking of it as ‘demonstrating our expertise publicly.’
Less "we provide excellent family law services." More "here's exactly how property settlements work in Victoria, based on representing 200+ clients through this process."
Show your work. Prove your expertise. Credit the right people. Keep doing the technical SEO fundamentals.
That's the playbook for post-December-2025 SEO.
Saw ranking drops after December's update? Leadtree specialises in E-E-A-T implementation and content strategy for Australian service businesses. We don't just audit your content; we rebuild it with proper author credentials, first-person expertise and technical SEO that actually ranks. Book a 30-minute free call to discuss how we can help today: https://calendly.com/leadtreemarketing/30min
