Is pure human content the only way to survive Google updates now?

[Excelerate_Services]

Hey guys,

Just wanted to start a quick discussion here about the ongoing war between AI content and real human writing.

Over the last few months, I have been checking some blogs and it feels like Google is completely destroying sites that just copy paste raw AI stuff from tools. On the other side, blogs that have real human experience and actual research are still doing fine and keeping their traffic.

Personally, I think pure human touch is now mandatory if you want to upscale a site for the long term.

What are your thoughts on this?
Are you guys still risking it with fresh domains and AI tools, or did you switch back to hiring actual writers?

Let me know what is working for you right now. Thanks.

 

[Ken Jeff]

I dont think AI content is the problem the problem is posting lots of generic content like empty phrases which offer nothing useful.
I agree that real experience adds valueI and AI can help but the most important thing is good research and content that solves real problems and provide users the answers they are actually searching for.

 

[Excelerate_Services]

I dont think AI content is the problem the problem is posting lots of generic content like empty phrases which offer nothing useful.
I agree that real experience adds valueI and AI can help but the most important thing is good research and content that solves real problems and provide users the answers they are actually searching for.

 

[Excelerate_Services]

Spot on, Ken! I completely agree with you. AI is a great tool for efficiency, but blindly copying and pasting generic output is exactly why sites are getting hammered. It’s all about context and solving the user's actual intent. Appreciate your insights on this

 

[sorenflake]

Hey guys,

Just wanted to start a quick discussion here about the ongoing war between AI content and real human writing.

Over the last few months, I have been checking some blogs and it feels like Google is completely destroying sites that just copy paste raw AI stuff from tools. On the other side, blogs that have real human experience and actual research are still doing fine and keeping their traffic.

Personally, I think pure human touch is now mandatory if you want to upscale a site for the long term.

What are your thoughts on this?
Are you guys still risking it with fresh domains and AI tools, or did you switch back to hiring actual writers?

Let me know what is working for you right now. Thanks.

i feel that the whole debate on human writing versus AI isn’t what matters now.rather, the question is whether or not the content actually adds value to the reader.ai will save time when researching nd drafting an article but adding concrete examples, doing fact checking nd adding some value makes all the difference.has anyone tried to test that on the same site instead of two enttirely different blogs?

 

[jaanny]

Hey guys,

Just wanted to start a quick discussion here about the ongoing war between AI content and real human writing.

Over the last few months, I have been checking some blogs and it feels like Google is completely destroying sites that just copy paste raw AI stuff from tools. On the other side, blogs that have real human experience and actual research are still doing fine and keeping their traffic.

Personally, I think pure human touch is now mandatory if you want to upscale a site for the long term.

What are your thoughts on this?
Are you guys still risking it with fresh domains and AI tools, or did you switch back to hiring actual writers?

Let me know what is working for you right now. Thanks.

imo the risk in this case could be building a site where in every page can be owned by any competing site. the use of AI is gud for its speed but the presence of concrete examples, quirks and real testing makes the page valuable.

 

[Excelerate_Services]

i feel that the whole debate on human writing versus AI isn’t what matters now.rather, the question is whether or not the content actually adds value to the reader.ai will save time when researching nd drafting an article but adding concrete examples, doing fact checking nd adding some value makes all the difference.has anyone tried to test that on the same site instead of two enttirely different blogs?

You nailed it. AI saves time, but adding real facts, concrete examples, and human fact-checking is what makes the content stand out. That's the real difference-maker now

 

[Elouera]

Hey guys,

Just wanted to start a quick discussion here about the ongoing war between AI content and real human writing.

Over the last few months, I have been checking some blogs and it feels like Google is completely destroying sites that just copy paste raw AI stuff from tools. On the other side, blogs that have real human experience and actual research are still doing fine and keeping their traffic.

Personally, I think pure human touch is now mandatory if you want to upscale a site for the long term.

What are your thoughts on this?
Are you guys still risking it with fresh domains and AI tools, or did you switch back to hiring actual writers?

Let me know what is working for you right now. Thanks.

I think that it comes down to the quality of the content having valuable content that has been well researched and has come from personal experience will have a great impact on your business simply publishing raw AI content without any checks is not a good long term strategy

 

[Excelerate_Services]

imo the risk in this case could be building a site where in every page can be owned by any competing site. the use of AI is gud for its speed but the presence of concrete examples, quirks and real testing makes the page valuable.

Absolutely spot on! Without real testing and unique examples, any competitor can copy your site. Real value and hands-on experience are the only way to survive updates

 

[medialounge]

Google is using AI to spot Ai based content and destroy them, to what end? Well, you are right the tilt is now more towards humanized writing than AI. What I will say to bloggers is, use Ai for your researches, read the research materials, digest and rewrite them in your own words. I think there is a pattern to human reasoning that Google does not want to disappear.

 

[Excelerate_Services]

I think that it comes down to the quality of the content having valuable content that has been well researched and has come from personal experience will have a great impact on your business simply publishing raw AI content without any checks is not a good long term strategy

Well said! Personal experience and deep research are definitely the keys to a solid long-term strategy. Raw AI just can't compete with that.

 

[GrowthBeast]

Apparently yes, we're back to square one. But that is not it. AI content is nothing but just what writers used to write earlier. I mean that is how it got trained, isn't it?

And now people search in AI tools to get the AI score of content written by humans. I have had so many clients who check on tools for AI content. I mean checking for plagiarism would make sense, but for AI? But sadly, that is the norm brother.

I think you should check the quality. The depth. The preciness. The efforts the writer had put in. You should check topic coverage and all that stuff. Check technical things and that is a much better approach. I mean that is how I am co-ordinating with one of my clients and the blogs now are actually showing in Google overviews.

We got it all wrong. Human writing is the best and that is why it is back!

 

[moazzamhs12]

I don’t think content has to be 100% human-written. AI can help with research and drafting, but original insights, fact-checking, real experience, and genuine value are what matter

 

[Excelerate_Services]

Google is using AI to spot Ai based content and destroy them, to what end? Well, you are right the tilt is now more towards humanized writing than AI. What I will say to bloggers is, use Ai for your researches, read the research materials, digest and rewrite them in your own words. I think there is a pattern to human reasoning that Google does not want to disappear.

100% agreed! Using AI as a research assistant but keeping the final writing completely human is the perfect approach right now. Google definitely values that unique human reasoning pattern.

 

[Excelerate_Services]

Apparently yes, we're back to square one. But that is not it. AI content is nothing but just what writers used to write earlier. I mean that is how it got trained, isn't it?

And now people search in AI tools to get the AI score of content written by humans. I have had so many clients who check on tools for AI content. I mean checking for plagiarism would make sense, but for AI? But sadly, that is the norm brother.

I think you should check the quality. The depth. The preciness. The efforts the writer had put in. You should check topic coverage and all that stuff. Check technical things and that is a much better approach. I mean that is how I am co-ordinating with one of my clients and the blogs now are actually showing in Google overviews.

We got it all wrong. Human writing is the best and that is why it is back!

Totally agree! Chasing AI detector scores is a waste of time. Focus should always be on content depth, quality, and topical coverage. Great to hear your blogs are hitting Google Overviews

 

[homeriscool]

I've never trusted unedited AI content on any of my websites because I have always suspected that Google could easily detect it at any time and destroy my websites.

Not worth the risk....

 

[FistFullOfCash]

I think its been that way.. I was using ZimmWriter and other tools for mass AI content creation years back. The import of hundreds of straight AI articles used to pull some clicks, that is less and less effective. Readability and SEO scores should be good to go according to SEO plugins like Yoast/RankMath, then you know its humanized to that standard for on-page and Google can pick up the pages on its index.

Right now Im running almost 80 websites, 5 applications with 1 in the app store. Mostly all sites/apps are developed, adding more content now. Instead of 1 main website because they are so easy to deploy and require only hosting and a $10 .com

 

[Excelerate_Services]

I don’t think content has to be 100% human-written. AI can help with research and drafting, but original insights, fact-checking, real experience, and genuine value are what matter

Well said! 100% human-written or not, if the content lacks original insights and real value, it won't survive. Balancing efficiency with true fact-checking is the sweet spot.

 

[gokhan45]

AI can speed things up, but someone still needs to check facts, add real examples and make the article useful. Just rewriting AI text isn't enough if every article says the same thing.

 

[Excelerate_Services]

I think its been that way.. I was using ZimmWriter and other tools for mass AI content creation years back. The import of hundreds of straight AI articles used to pull some clicks, that is less and less effective. Readability and SEO scores should be good to go according to SEO plugins like Yoast/RankMath, then you know its humanized to that standard for on-page and Google can pick up the pages on its index.

Right now Im running almost 80 websites, 5 applications with 1 in the app store. Mostly all sites/apps are developed, adding more content now. Instead of 1 main website because they are so easy to deploy and require only hosting and a $10 .com

That’s a massive setup with 80 websites! You made a very valid point about Yoast/RankMath scores; optimization plugins definitely don't guarantee that the content satisfies what Google actually looks for post-update. Scaling with multiple smaller properties is a smart way to diversify risk.