3 ms·
>but I got into SEO out of interest in the "organic web" vs. everything being driven by ads. If the owner of an SEO site wants to use AI for "content generatio
by password11 4y ago
>but I got into SEO out of interest in the "organic web" vs. everything being driven by ads.
If the owner of an SEO site wants to use AI for "content generation", doesn't that mean they didn't care about the human-generated content in the first place?
Seems like a choice between garbage and slightly more expensive garbage. What is interesting or organic about that? Back in the day, people used to put things on their websites because they cared about it and wanted to say it.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- noduerme 4y agoI read this more as meaning that they work for a legitimate company or two that is trying to organically improve their search results without stooping to nasty tricks
- rgrieselhuber 4y agoYes, that is the intent
- password11 4y agoBut if said company doesn't care about the human-generated content quality in the first place (evidenced by the fact that they're willing to replace it with AI generation), how is that not also a "nasty trick" by your standard? At the end of the day they just want to optimize search results. And the Overton window of acceptability currently allows "human generated SEO content" but not "AI generated SEO content". It's just an arbitrary rule.
- rgrieselhuber 4y agoI think the difference between created content vs. generated content is quite more than arbitrary. If the leading search engines truly don't care about the difference, I'd predict a future where you have more bifurcation between a human web and a bot-driven one.