Is Google "Stealing" International Traffic with Automated Translations? The Truth Behind Translation Proxies
The article analyzes accusations that Google redirects international traffic through automated translations and its own proxies, reducing publishers’ control and earnings. The phenomenon is more complex than it seems, varying depending on device, browser, and market. Recommendations include segmenting traffic, localizing strategy, and strict monitoring to minimize risks.
Is Google “Stealing” International Traffic with Automated Translations? The Truth Behind Translation Proxies
A recent blog post from Ahrefs accuses Google of “stealing” international traffic by automatically translating content from other languages and serving it through its own infrastructure—effectively bypassing the original site.
This accusation sparked strong reactions in the SEO industry and among publishers. The implications are indeed serious, but—as always with Google—the reality is way more nuanced than the clickbait title suggests.
The headline “Google Is Stealing Your International Search Traffic With Automated Translations” is clearly designed to stir the pot. The word “stealing” implies malicious intent, and the assertive phrasing makes it sound like an undeniable fact.
But if you read closely, the article itself admits this phenomenon only happens when there’s no quality localized content available in that language. In other words, it’s not exactly “classic theft.”
Real-World Testing: Way More Nuanced Than It Looks
Yes, Google does sometimes show auto-translated results in certain markets, but generally only when there are no relevant localized pages. The real issue is “disintermediation”—users get their answers directly in the SERP without ever visiting your site.
From my own testing, the effect varies a lot depending on browser and country. On Chrome, most searches send you straight to the publisher’s website, where the translation happens in the browser—no loss of data or attribution.
On Safari or Firefox, however, the Google translation proxy (translate.goog domain) kicks in much more often, keeping the entire experience within Google’s ecosystem, away from the publisher’s control.
This behavior, validated by independent tests and analyzed in detailed articles, shows just how important it is to segment by browser and market to properly evaluate your real exposure.
How the Proxies Work & Who Actually Loses
Google quietly rolled out the proxy system, which activates when there aren’t satisfying local answers. The process works very differently depending on the browser.
On Chrome, clicking takes you to the site, and translation happens in-browser—the publisher keeps their analytics and monetization.
On Safari or Firefox, though, the link goes to a .translate.goog version, where all navigation stays “trapped” in the proxy: every click on the translated site is still redirected through Google’s infrastructure. The publisher loses analytics, retargeting, and revenue potential.
The likelihood of this happening varies dramatically by market and device. In Brazil, Chrome dominates with 83% market share, so the effective risk stays below 7% of traffic. In Mexico, the situation is similar, though Safari exceeds 9%.
In markets with high Safari usage (iOS/tablet), the risk of losing genuine traffic is much more real and requires careful monitoring [The Influence of Google's Translation Services on International ...].
Disintermediation: The Real Impact and How to Handle It
When users get “trapped” in the translation proxy, publishers lose all visibility into visitor behavior, any chance at monetization, and the ability to build direct relationships with their audience.
Essentially, part of your SEO value and brand equity is siphoned away—and the risk scales directly with the percentage of your site’s traffic coming from Safari/Firefox.
Recent data shows that, while Google cites technical and accessibility reasons, the current infrastructure overwhelmingly favors Google as the data and control holder—not as a partner to publishers [Google Flips Stance on Automatic AI Translations, Requires Content ...].
From my experience with global websites, the importance of browser-segmented analytics, adapting to markets where a lack of localized content creates real opportunities, and tightly monitoring the impact of auto-translations at the data and revenue level becomes critical.
Official Position & Industry Reaction
Google says the proxy translation only activates when “there’s no quality localized content for that query,” and stresses the goal of providing relevant answers to all users, regardless of language.
However, the technical design ensures Google has total control, leaving publishers with no attribution, no data, and no real opt-out option [Google Investigating Concerns Over Search Translated Results].
So the controversy is not just technical, but also about business models and power dynamics between platforms and content creators.
Many experts highlight a paradigm shift: Google, which for years penalized auto-translations on publisher sites, now translates and hosts its own unvalidated content—with serious ethical and business implications [Google Flips Stance on Automatic AI Translations, Requires Content ...].
What Can You Actually Do? Practical Recommendations
1. Analyze Traffic by Segment
Measure Chrome, Safari, and Firefox exposure separately, and monitor device share (mobile/tablet/desktop). In Chrome-dominated markets, the direct risk from Google’s proxy is low. In mobile/iOS-heavy markets, tests show much greater impact.
2. Monitor Proxy Behavior
Use dedicated tools (Google Search Console, filter for “translated results”) to identify which pages and markets are affected by the proxy translation and adjust your localization efforts accordingly.
3. Localize Strategically
Move fast where translated content indicates real demand to regain control, data, and monetization. Publish localized versions, optimize them for search in the target market, and update hreflang.
4. Keep Up with Industry Changes
Google is already investigating criticism and might introduce changes to AI proxies [Google Investigating Concerns Over Search Translated Results].
5. Advocacy & Transparency
Publicly call for opt-in/opt-out choices and transparent reporting on how content is served translated within Google’s infrastructure.
Winners vs. Losers – Who Really Benefits?
Every change at Google’s level creates new imbalances: users gain easier access to information in their language; Google consolidates its ecosystem, while publishers who don’t localize fast lose data, traffic, and control.
Only those who quickly turn disintermediation signals into strategic action—by localizing content—can rebalance the scales.
Long story short, the risk is real, but strictly depends on technology, market, and the proactivity of each site. For global site admins, ongoing adaptation is essential to preserving SEO fairness and commercial value [The Influence of Google's Translation Services on International ...].
Extra Resources & Technical Details
For a deep technical dive into how Google’s translation services work, who actually benefits, and what strategies the experts recommend:
- The Influence of Google's Translation Services on International ...
- Google Flips Stance on Automatic AI Translations, Requires Content ...
- Google Investigating Concerns Over Search Translated Results
These resources don’t just explore the technical impact, but also the implications for editorial control, SEO value, and long-term monetization—with case studies and practical tips for publishers looking to protect their international results.
My Take:
Google’s auto-translation is radically changing not just the international SEO landscape, but the entire business dynamic between platforms and creators. The solution: granular monitoring, rapid localization, and ongoing advocacy for transparency and fairness in the digital value chain.
