It Seems Even Your Favorite Authority Websites Are Using AI Content

[HenryObi]

This tweet shows CNET, one of the biggest authority website is using AI to write content and have humans review them.

And Google apparently doesn't care much.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1613110185995771905

Perhaps it's time I figure out a way to let AI write for me instead of paying writers.

What do you think about. cNET using AI content writers?

 

[Joseph O]

Hmmmm. I think I should use AI more. Hardwork is worthless these days

 

[Elvlin]

lol they don't even bother to remove the trademark

 

[HenryObi]

Hmmmm. I think I should use AI more. Hardwork is worthless these days

We all seem to be lagging behind on the AI topic.

 

[HenryObi]

lol they don't even bother to remove the trademark

Maybe they the disclaimer would prevent Google from taken action since they're not 'misleading' anyone.

Let's see how it works out

 

[Mr Positive]

Musk had tweeted about this indirectly saying many big sites use AI to write content so not surprising for me to see this

 

[Elvlin]

Maybe they the disclaimer would prevent Google from taken action since they're not 'misleading' anyone.

Let's see how it works out

there is always exception for google , i have seen old authority site that just copy and paste article and still rank

 

[HenryObi]

there is always exception for google , i have seen old authority site that just copy and paste article and still rank

I've seen that too.

 

[Thunder Digitals]

The thing is, why they mentioned that they used AI to create the content?

 

[IM Dude]

I think CNET is a crap tech site so of course they will use ai. I never read anything there. Download some old versions or something software.

But in any case if you writers produce +roiling for you then it don't matter, else go for ai.

 

[HenryObi]

I think CNET is a crap tech site

I agree with this. There were times they promoted absolutely non-tech related articles and products. It's all about the money

 

[aristocratic]

As long as the articles are edited and fact checked by humans, there is nothing wrong with it.


Edit: https://www.blackhatworld.com/seo/g...ut-ai-content-provided-it-is-factual.1465985/

 

[HenryObi]

As long as the articles are edited and fact checked by humans, there is nothing wrong with it.

Question is, does Google even know what is correct and what is not?

I don't mean with very simple questions like age, date etc. Topics that requires proper knowledge and maybe experience. Would Google be able to know if the content was truly fact checked and confirmed to be accurate?

Or we all just need to slam 'this has been fact checked to be correct by our editor' and boom!

 

[aristocratic]

Or we all just need to slam 'this has been fact checked to be correct by our editor' and boom!

Not a bad idea to add a disclaimer

 

[aurim]

Logically, those should get a lower priority in rankings compared to content not declared as AI.

This until AI writers really becomes better than humans.

 

[IM Dude]

I agree with this. There were times they promoted absolutely non-tech related articles and products. It's all about the money

Last thing you wanna do it write articles that require 100% facts like tech niche with ai and CNET is doing exactly that.

 

[Sartre]

Google never said AI is bad, just that bad AI is bad.

AP has been automating stories using machine learning since 2014, and Reuters started in about 2018.

 

[thescrrr]

Yes, many authority websites and publications are using AI to generate content. AI-generated content can include things like news articles, financial reports, weather forecasts, and sports recaps. These types of content are typically created using natural language generation (NLG) algorithms, which can take structured data as input and then automatically generate written or spoken narratives. These can be used to supplement human-written content, or even replace them in some cases.

However, it's important to note that the quality of AI-generated content can vary widely depending on the specific algorithm used, the quality of the input data, and the humans who oversee the generation process. Additionally AI-generated content can also be prone to errors and may also be not as accurate and nuanced as human-written content.

 

[Mactronn]

Not only CNET but Bankrate as well.

 

[HenryObi]

Not only CNET but Bankrate as well.

View attachment 238905

An important question should be, why do they keep including that disclaimer?

Is there any info from Google that requires them to do so?