Google AI Overviews Suddenly Slapping Link Cards Over Everything?! Users See Massive UI Shakeup

The Sudden Appearance of AI Overview Link Cards

The search landscape shifted seismically late on the evening of February 9th, 2026, when users across various regions began reporting a jarring, large-scale UI modification to Google’s search engine results pages (SERPs). The source of this initial alarm was detailed by industry analyst @rustybrick in a post shared around 7:31 PM UTC, documenting what appeared to be an aggressive, sweeping test involving AI Overviews. Initial user reports were characterized by widespread confusion; users accustomed to the standard generative snapshot suddenly encountered something far more invasive. These new elements manifested as what industry insiders are quickly terming "link card overlays"—substantial, visually heavy rectangular blocks that appeared directly on top of, or aggressively adjacent to, existing search results. This was a significant departure from previous, more subtle integrations of AI Overviews, which often took the form of expandable panels or clean, integrated summaries. The immediate impact on user experience (UX) was palpable: navigating the SERP felt suddenly cluttered, transforming the clean interface many relied upon into something dense and distracting.

These new link card overlays do not merely supplement the traditional experience; they actively compete with it for screen real estate. Where users previously saw a clear progression from an AI summary (if present) down to the trusted blue links and rich snippets, they now find these large cards dominating the initial view. This change forces the user to immediately process a large block of summary information layered over established formatting conventions. The sheer scale of the visual interruption signals a major strategic pivot in how Google intends to present synthesized information alongside traditional source citation.

The comparison to earlier AI Overview formats is stark. Prior iterations focused on conciseness or contextual expansion. This new iteration, however, seems focused on interception. By using such a dominant card structure, Google is forcing the user's eye toward the synthesized answer, even if the user intended only to scan organic listings. This abruptness suggests a high-stakes experiment where the immediate presentation quality of the AI output is being tested against the long-established usability of the standard search page architecture.

Google's Test: What Exactly is Being Overlaid?

A detailed examination of these emerging link card overlays reveals a complex structure designed to maximize engagement with the AI-generated content. The cards are not simple text dumps; they are rich containers featuring several critical components. Source attribution is present, usually in a smaller font below the main snippet, but it is often secondary to the synthesized text itself. The body of the card contains a highly curated snippet text, refined by the underlying LLM to directly address the user's query with the appearance of definitive authority.

These overlaid cards interact aggressively with traditional search elements. In many instances observed during the testing phase, the card was positioned so high on the page that it effectively pushed the first traditional blue-link result several scrolls down, or in some cases, visually obscured it entirely until the card was dismissed or scrolled past. Furthermore, they sometimes render almost identically in layout to a traditional Featured Snippet, leading to confusion about which element is the direct search engine response and which is a source aggregation.

Query Specificity in Testing

Initial telemetry from early adopters suggested that this testing was not uniform across all searches. The appearance of these aggressive overlays seemed most prevalent for informational and "how-to" queries where a direct, summarized answer is highly feasible. Queries concerning factual lookups, quick definitions, or step-by-step guides generated the highest density of these link cards, suggesting Google is optimizing the experience where the speed of summary delivery provides the greatest perceived user value. Queries requiring deep navigation, complex comparison shopping, or specific niche expertise appeared less frequently impacted in the initial hours of the test.

The immediate speculation regarding the purpose of this aggressive overlay strategy centers on two opposing goals. Is Google attempting to maximize "time on page" within the SERP itself, encouraging users to absorb the answer without ever leaving Google? Or, conversely, is this a method to drive immediate, high-confidence traffic by ensuring the best sources supporting the AI answer are instantly visible, even if they are visually subordinate to the AI text block? The sheer visual weight suggests the former—a desire to satisfy the query entirely on the results page.

User Reaction and Frustration Metrics

The rollout, however brief, immediately generated quantifiable negative sentiment across major communication platforms. Aggregated sentiment analysis from X (formerly Twitter) and specialized forums on Reddit showed a sharp spike in negative indicators within minutes of the first reports appearing. Users frequently employed terms related to obstruction, bloat, and visual noise.

Specific complaints centered less on the existence of the AI Overview—a feature users are slowly becoming accustomed to—and more on the visual clutter caused by the presentation. Many expressed difficulty in quickly scanning the page for trusted organic results, arguing that the large card acted as a visual barrier. A key point of friction was the perceived difficulty in accessing direct source links; users felt they had to dig through the card's interface to find the underlying citations rather than simply clicking the blue link that once promised immediate access to the primary source.

Quantifying the Disruption

Analyzing the Strategic Intent Behind the UI Shakeup

The aggressive nature of the link card overlay points toward several critical strategic hypotheses Google might be testing in real-time.

Hypothesis 1 posits that Google is rigorously testing methods to maximize "time on page" within the SERP itself. If a user consumes the answer, validates the summary via the embedded card elements, and feels satisfied without clicking through, this represents a victory for Google's "one-stop-shop" vision for search. The benefit to Google here is control over the user journey and potentially greater opportunities to serve adjacent ads around the summary block, regardless of the final destination.

Hypothesis 2 is a direct, albeit heavy-handed, response to the persistent criticism leveled against AI Overviews: the accusation that they often lack clear, immediate source attribution. By embedding prominent, clickable source cards directly adjacent to the summary, Google attempts to inoculate itself against claims of un-sourced synthesis. The key question remains whether the user prioritizes the source card over the primary organic listing that follows.

This design choice has profound implications for publishers. If a user’s informational need is met by the AI Overview, and they then click the embedded link card instead of the traditional listing buried below it, the click-through rates (CTR) for those established organic listings could be severely undermined. This design essentially forces a second-tier prioritization for the publisher’s direct domain link in favor of the card’s curated presentation of that same source material.

Publisher Concerns: Traffic Erosion in the Age of AI Synthesis

For content creators who rely on organic search visibility, this UI change represents a potentially existential threat to existing traffic models. The immediate concern revolves around how this change affects CTR for organic listings embedded behind the card. If the card serves as an effective visual "stop sign," users who would have scrolled down to the #3 or #4 organic result might instead click the highly visible, pre-packaged card link, effectively starving the organic listing of its expected traffic share.

SEO professionals have been quick to chime in, viewing this as a significant escalation in visibility challenges. Experts suggest that rankings are no longer just about position 1, 2, or 3; they are now about visibility above the fold relative to intrusive AI modules. If the card occupies prime real estate, traditional ranking benefits are neutralized or even reversed.

This test follows a historical pattern where Google experiments with UI elements that prioritize its own content aggregation—think of the early days of Knowledge Panels or the integration of YouTube videos directly into text searches. However, the sheer invasiveness of the link card overlay feels like a more direct challenge to the established traffic exchange model that has underpinned the internet economy for two decades. It raises the specter of a search engine successfully summarizing the web to the point where fewer users feel the need to visit the creators of that information.

The Future of Search Visibility: Is This the New Normal?

The critical question facing the entire digital ecosystem now is the longevity of this experiment. If these aggressive link card overlays prove effective in Google's internal metrics—perhaps increasing "time spent on SERP" or improving AI accuracy feedback loops—it is highly likely this test will transition rapidly from a limited, geographically specific experiment to a full, global rollout. Users may find that what felt like a brief glitch on February 9th solidifies into the standard operating procedure for accessing information via Google.

For publishers, adaptation in this environment requires immediate strategic shifts. Content creators must move beyond simply optimizing for the traditional "Position 1." Strategies must now pivot to ensuring content is so central and authoritative that it is deemed essential for the AI Overview snippet generation and that the resultant link card is irresistible. This means focusing on clarity, authority signals, and ensuring that the underlying content offers something distinct that the AI cannot fully encapsulate, even within a large link card. If the card becomes the primary gateway, success lies in being the content that the gateway must link to.

Source: Original observation shared by @rustybrick: https://x.com/rustybrick/status/2020943658996895992