TL;DR
- John Mueller confirmed on Reddit (reported 10-13 September 2026) that Search Console gives every link inside an AI Overview the position of the AI Overview block itself.
- An AI Overview impression is counted when the answer is on the served page, even if never scrolled into view; links behind Show more are not counted until expanded.
- The generative AI report is a filtered view of Web search data, so its impressions and clicks must not be added to Web totals.
- Mueller said the old position 1-10 model is hard to map to modern results pages and asked for suggestions, but announced no change or timeline.
Google's John Mueller has agreed that the average position shown for AI Overviews in Search Console's generative AI performance report does not describe where a site's link sits inside the AI answer. Answering a Reddit thread reported by Search Engine Roundtable on 10 September 2026 and by Search Engine Journal on 13 September, he said position for these features is "hard to do in a way that makes it useful", so Google records the AI Overview as a single block, and every link inside it inherits that block's position.
That one sentence changes how the report should be read. Impressions, position and click-through rate in the AI view follow the same counting rules Search Console has used for ten blue links for years, and those rules were not designed for an answer box that holds several citations at once. Below is what was said, what the counting rules actually are, and how to use the report without drawing the wrong conclusion from it.
What Mueller said, and where he said it
The discussion started with a Reddit post summarising how the generative AI view of the Performance report counts data. The poster made four points. An AI Overview impression does not prove a person saw the link. Links hidden behind the "Show more" expansion are handled differently. The position metric describes the AI Overview on the page, not the link inside it. And the generative AI report is a filtered view of data that already sits in the normal Web search type, not an extra layer on top of it.
Mueller replied that this was "pretty much it". He pointed readers to Google's help centre article on how impressions, clicks and position are counted, which he described as a very long document by now, and said the position question is the hard one. Google currently tracks AI features the way it tracks many other search features, as one block, and that position is not broken out separately in the generative AI report.
He then went further than a documentation note. Results pages, he wrote, now offer users many ways to interact, so the old idea of "position 1 - 10" is hard to map or make useful for site owners. He asked anyone with ideas on what position tracking would be useful to share them, and said he was happy to take that to the team. Search Engine Journal framed the exchange as Google admitting the reporting is inadequate. Mueller's own words are more measured: he confirmed the limits and asked for ideas, without describing any replacement.
The counting rules, one by one
None of the rules below is new. What is new is a Google employee confirming, in public, that they produce numbers site owners should not read at face value for AI surfaces. The table sets out each rule as described in the thread Mueller endorsed.
| Metric | How it is counted for AI Overviews | What that means when you read it |
|---|---|---|
| Impression | Counted when the AI Overview containing your link is on the results page that was served, whether or not it was scrolled into view | Can overstate how many people actually saw your link |
| Links behind "Show more" | Not counted until the user expands the answer | Can understate exposure for links placed lower in the answer |
| Position | Every link inside the AI Overview gets the position of the AI Overview block itself | Shows where the answer box sat, not where your citation sat inside it |
| Generative AI report totals | A filtered view of data already in the Web search type | Do not add AI numbers to Web numbers; they are the same rows |
Impressions: served, not seen
Search Console's standard rule counts an impression when a result appears on a page of results that was delivered to the user. A person does not have to scroll to it. For an ordinary blue link at position eight that has always been a mild inflation. For an AI Overview it matters more, because the answer box usually renders near the top, so a link cited inside it collects an impression on nearly every query where the answer shows, even when the user reads the first two lines and leaves.
"Show more": the rule cuts the other way
The same standard rule excludes elements a user has to click to reveal. Many AI Overviews show a truncated answer with an expansion control. A citation that only appears after expansion is not counted until someone expands it. So for sites whose citations tend to sit lower in the answer, the report can understate their presence. The two effects pull in opposite directions, which is part of why a single impression figure for AI surfaces is hard to interpret.
Position: the box, not the link
This is the rule Mueller addressed directly. If an AI Overview sits at the top of the page and cites five sources, all five get the same position. A site cited first and a site cited fifth look identical in the report. Average position in the AI view therefore tells you roughly where on the page the answer appeared for queries where you were cited. It says nothing about whether you were the lead citation or a footnote.
Filtered view: no double counting
The generative AI report does not hold separate traffic. It filters rows already present in the Web search type. For example, a site that sees 40,000 impressions in Web search and 6,000 in the AI view has 40,000 impressions, of which 6,000 involved an AI surface. Adding the two together in a dashboard counts the same traffic twice, and the thread was explicit that the two should not be summed.
Why position is so hard to define now
Mueller's remark about "position 1 - 10" describes a problem that goes beyond AI Overviews. A modern results page can carry an AI Overview, sponsored results, a map pack, People Also Ask, video and image units, discussion results and product grids before the first standard organic link. Search Console has long assigned positions to these features by treating each as a block and counting from the top. That worked tolerably when features held one or two links. It breaks down when a single block holds a generated answer with several citations, each of which may be the reason a user clicks.
There are several ways Google could report citation placement: the order of citations inside the answer, whether a link appears before or after the expansion control, whether the link sat in the answer text or a side panel of sources. Mueller did not say Google is building any of these. He asked for suggestions, which is a signal the team is still deciding what would be meaningful rather than a promise of a new metric.
How this connects to earlier Search Console issues
RA has tracked the generative AI report since it reached every property in August. Two earlier issues are worth keeping in mind when reading this one. On 19 August Google confirmed a logging error that deflated generative AI and Discover data from 13 August, so any comparison that spans mid-August needs that caveat. Earlier, in early August, short one-word queries appearing in Search Console were identified as AI Mode follow-up questions rather than spam. Both episodes and this one point to the same thing: the report is still settling, and its numbers need context before they go into a monthly deck.
What to check in your own Search Console
You do not need to stop using the report. You need to stop using position from it as a ranking signal. A practical routine:
- Read clicks first, impressions second, position last. Clicks from AI surfaces are the least ambiguous number in the report, because a click requires the link to have been visible and chosen.
- Compare the AI view with the Web view for the same queries. Filter both to one page and one query group. If the AI share of impressions rises while total clicks stay flat, the AI answer may be absorbing intent the page used to satisfy.
- Do not treat average position changes in the AI view as ranking changes. A shift from 1.4 to 2.1 may only mean an ad or another feature moved above the answer box on some queries.
- Check the page's own share of the answer manually. For your ten most valuable queries, look at the live AI Overview and note whether you are cited, and in what order. Search Console cannot give you that today.
- Watch branded search and direct visits alongside AI clicks. A citation that does not produce a click can still send a person back later through a brand query, and that will never appear in the AI view.
- Annotate the 13 August logging error in any trend line that crosses it.
What the source did not say
Mueller did not announce a change to the report, a timeline for a new metric, or any fix. He did not give numbers on how often links sit behind "Show more". He did not comment on AI Mode separately from AI Overviews in the part of the reply that was quoted. The characterisation of the report as "inadequate" belongs to Search Engine Journal's headline and analysis, not to Mueller. The counting rules come from a Reddit user's summary that Mueller said was accurate, and from Google's help documentation he referred people to.
What this means for Thai marketers
Thai sites are exposed to the same counting rules, because Search Console reports are the same product in every market. Where AI Overviews show for Thai-language queries, a Thai site cited in them will see its AI-view position reflect the answer box's slot rather than its citation order, exactly as an English site would. For businesses reporting SEO to management in Bangkok, the safe approach is to report AI-surface clicks and the trend in AI share of impressions, and to leave average position out of any slide about AI visibility. If you need to know whether your pages are cited, and how prominently, that currently takes manual checks or a third-party tracker, backed by a clear GEO strategy for the pages that matter. Our SEO audit covers how Search Console data is being read, and the SEO Thailand team can help separate reporting noise from real ranking movement.
Frequently asked questions
Does average position in the generative AI report show where my link appears in the AI Overview?
No, it shows the position of the AI Overview block on the results page. Every link cited inside the same AI Overview is given that block's position, so the first and fifth citation look identical in the report. Mueller confirmed this is how Google tracks it today.
Does an AI Overview impression mean someone saw my link?
Not necessarily, because an impression is counted when the answer containing your link is on the served page, whether or not it was scrolled into view. The exception is links behind the "Show more" expansion, which are not counted until a user expands the answer.
Should I add generative AI impressions to my Web search impressions?
No, the generative AI report is a filtered view of rows already in the Web search type. Adding the two double counts the same impressions and clicks.
Is Google changing the report?
Not according to anything Mueller said. He described the current approach, said position is hard to make useful, and invited suggestions for the team, but announced no change and gave no timeline.
Do these rules apply to Thai websites?
Yes, Search Console uses the same counting rules in every market, so Thai sites cited in AI Overviews are reported the same way. The source did not discuss any market-specific differences.
Search Console is still the only first-party view of how Google shows your site, and the generative AI report is useful once you know what each number is measuring. If you want a second pair of eyes on how your team reads it, talk to Relevant Audience.
