WaffleDrifter
Newbie
- Apr 30, 2026
- 35
- 13
The sites that perform well usually edit and improve AI drafts instead of publishing them directly. Adding experience and unique points makes a big difference.
From what i have seen the problem is not ai generated content. it is generic content. if an artiicle says the same things as hundreds of others it is probablly not going to do well no matter who or what wrote it. ai can save a lot of time but it is ur own research examples nd perspective that makes the content rank.AI content alone doesn't appear to cause ranking drops.Google mainly rewards content that's useful, original, and genuinely helpful.
Many AI-written sites still rank well when the content is high quality.
AI detection tools like Originality.ai or Copyleaks don't match Google's ranking systems.The best approach is to use AI as a draft and add real value through editing and original insights.
This is a classic case where everyone builds their own farm of low value generated content, hoping for hundreds of thousands of daily users. But before you jump into execution, you need to understand what you're doing and why. The approach of pumping out thousands of pages just for traffic is fundamentally wrong from the start. What real value does your content provide compared to all your competitors? If it's not even a rewrite, but just a generic model-generated gpt response with no facts, no expertise, and no real user experience- then it's pointless. As an experiment, try adding proper copywriting to just one project at that scale, and you'll feel the differenceBeen scaling up content production with AI on a few sites and getting paranoid after seeing "ranking tanked, pretty sure it's the AI content" threads pop up, but plenty of other people saying their AI-heavy sites are still ranking fine months later with zero issues. Feels like everyone's had a completely different experience and nobody actually knows which sites got hit for AI content specifically or what..
Is anyone actually seeing a real isolated ranking impact from this? Does running stuff through Originality.ai/Copyleaks/whatever actually correlate with what Google itself flags? Curious what people are doing differently on the sites that held up heavier humanizing/rewriting passes, mixing in more manually written sections or it is mostly random as anyone knows those tools doens't really work...
AI content is essentially a retelling of what already exists. It doesn't add any value to search results. Therefore, it doesn't workHonestly, I think bad AI content is the real problem and not AI itself because the People who spend time on good prompts and clean up the content seem to be doing just fine and natural-looking content is still ranking fine.
Where did this conclusion come from? GPT?)If your domain has authority, you can use any content and it will rank.