Not in any useful way. There is no control that removes you from AI Overviews while keeping you in Google Search, because Overviews are built on the same index. The available options either remove you from Search entirely or limit how a snippet is displayed, and neither is what most firms actually want.

The short version

Why the control people are looking for does not exist

The request is reasonable. A firm sees its content summarised in an Overview, notices the click did not arrive, and asks to be excluded from the summary while staying in the results below it.

Google does not offer that. Overviews are assembled from the same index that produces ordinary results, so there is no switch separating the two. What exists is a set of blunter instruments:

Google-Extended. Widely misunderstood, and worth being precise about because acting on the misunderstanding costs visibility. It governs whether your content is used for Gemini training and grounding. It does not remove you from AI Overviews. Firms have added it believing it was the opt-out, lost Gemini visibility, and kept appearing in Overviews exactly as before.

nosnippet. Prevents a text snippet being shown. It applies everywhere, so you also lose the descriptive snippet under your ordinary search result, which usually costs more clicks than the Overview did.

max-snippet:[n]. Limits snippet length rather than preventing use. A partial measure with the same side effect.

data-nosnippet. Excludes a specific passage rather than the page. This is the only instrument with a genuinely narrow use: fencing off a section you do not want quoted, such as pricing detail or a passage that reads badly out of context.

Blocking Googlebot. Removes you from Google Search. Complete, effective, and almost always a bad trade.

The question underneath the question

Most people asking this are not really trying to disappear. They have noticed that impressions are up and clicks are flat, and exclusion feels like the way to force the click back.

It does not work that way. If your content is good enough to be summarised, removing it does not send the user to your site. It sends them to whoever is summarised instead, and you lose the citation as well as the click.

The exceptions where exclusion is genuinely right are narrow: content licensed on terms that prohibit it, material behind a paywall you cannot risk leaking, and specific passages that are misleading when extracted. For those, data-nosnippet on the passage is the proportionate tool.

How to check it yourself

  1. Search your terms with a UK location and see whether an Overview appears and whether you are cited in it.
  2. Check robots.txt for Google-Extended added on the assumption it was the opt-out.
  3. Look for nosnippet in your page templates, particularly if anyone has experimented.
  4. In Search Console, find pages with high impressions, strong position and very low clicks. That pattern often means an Overview is answering in place using your content.

What to do about it

  1. Remove controls added on a misunderstanding, especially a blanket Google-Extended block.
  2. Use data-nosnippet surgically where a specific passage genuinely should not be quoted.
  3. Change what you measure. If citation presence is not in your reporting, Overviews will look like pure loss when they are frequently brand exposure at the moment of decision.
  4. Give people a reason to click that the summary cannot satisfy: tools, calculators, current data, the specific detail a general answer cannot carry.

Back to all GEO questions →