Are AI content generators still ranking well long term?

I’ve been seeing mixed results with AI-generated content lately. Some sites seem to scale fast with it, while others lose rankings after updates.

For people testing this consistently, are heavily automated sites still holding rankings long term or becoming riskier now?

Short answer: AI-generated content can work well. But there are a bunch of other factors that matter for high ranking.

AI content can still scale, but sites relying heavily on automation without human editing are risky—Google favors quality, originality, and user value. Best approach: use AI to draft, then add expert insights, personal touches, and thorough editing before publishing.

AI is THE only content generator you use today. Nothing else. I've posted about Claude, it's beyond any capability of any tool I've ever used

From what I've seen, it's a mixed bag. Some AI content still does alright, but Google's getting smarter and penalizing sites that rely too heavily on it, so it's definitely becoming riskier to scale with AI content alone

GEORGEDINAL said:

I’ve been seeing mixed results with AI-generated content lately. Some sites seem to scale fast with it, while others lose rankings after updates.

For people testing this consistently, are heavily automated sites still holding rankings long term or becoming riskier now?

Click to expand...

You basically answered your own question. The truth is, SEO results are always a mixed bag, regardless of whether you use AI or not.

I'm not a native English speaker, so before AI came along, I relied heavily on scraping and spinning content. Every now and then, I’d pay top dollar for high quality, authoritative writers. Even then, it was always a coin toss: 50% of the articles would rank and dominate, while the other 50% completely flopped.

The exact same rule applies to AI content today....it's a 50/50 split. That's exactly why half the community swears AI works, and the other half says it’s dead. It’s the same old debate we see with black-hat vs. white-hat SEO. Some guys are crushing it with automated link building, while others insist pure white-hat is the only way. Yet, if you browse the white-hat subforums, you'll still see plenty of people crying about their sites getting penalized by Google updates.

At the end of the day, quantity matters because it's a numbers game. I run multiple websites in the same niche, and I just focus my energy on whichever sites actually start ranking.

So, to answer your question: yes, AI content absolutely works. I rely on it 100% now. Just don't forget to build backlinks...too many people are completely ignoring that part these days

Sadly, I've been seeing the same thing. It's like, some AI-generated stuff still does alright for a while, but google seems to be getting better at spotting the low-quality content and tanking those sites eventually

Yes AI works fine here. By finding which model works with the niche is most useful. Also no matter what you must provide useful information so always give a proper prompt and all the knowledge base. I would train the model before generating the content.

GEORGEDINAL said:

I’ve been seeing mixed results with AI-generated content lately. Some sites seem to scale fast with it, while others lose rankings after updates.

For people testing this consistently, are heavily automated sites still holding rankings long term or becoming riskier now?

Click to expand...

AI content can still rank long term, but sites that add original insights, expertise, and strong editing tend to survive updates much better than fully automated ones.