Using AI Creation

Did you submit your websites to your Google Search Console
where they tell you the exact reason why your pages are not
indexed, or are you making assumptions as to why your sites
are not performing well?

Also, what is your opinion about A.I.-generated code for things
such as websites, browser extensions, plugins, apps, etc.

Do you think that A.I. should not be used for any of those.

That's an interesting perspective, and I've observed similar patterns myself. AI-generated content can be a helpful tool, but it seems like search engines and social media platforms are quietly pushing back against it. Google, in particular, tends to favor content that feels natural, well-researched, and engaging - something AI still struggles to fully replicate.

Well maybe Ai its disliked by google but in my case of not having experience in writing articles probably it will take me 3 to 4 hours to write an article and i dont know if it will be a good one
So instead i prefer to create an article in few seconds with chatgpt
Yea for people that want someting serious ai would not be a good option but for those who cannot write content or dont have the time then Ai its better than nothing

Using AI creation is an advantage as it helps us to get ideas but not to the point that we have to rely on it entirely.

AI-generated content often gets deprioritized by platforms like Google and YouTube. Use real images, heavily edit AI text, and prefer authentic footage for better performance. Quality and authenticity matter.

To hell with creation, let's figure delivery!

What if all your meticulously configured marketin' assets were SUMMERIZED by default for the benefit of your audience?

That's an interesting observation! It does seem like platforms are actively pushing back against AI-generated content, especially when it's unedited or lacks a human touch. Google's stance on AI-generated text aligns with their broader focus on high-quality, user-first content.

For YouTube Shorts, it's fascinating that AI-generated clips aren't even getting the chance to be seen. Do you think this is due to YouTube's algorithm specifically flagging AI content, or could it be a matter of engagement signals such as viewers interacting less with AI-generated visuals?

Also, have you tested mixing AI-generated elements with real footage to see if that makes any difference?

Anyone looked at the impact when using on facebook or instagram/tiktok? I have run across a lot of AI content in my feeds so I assume it's not de-prioritized...but maybe there's just a ton out there?

For text content, if done purely via AI, it might get de-prioritized. But if content is original supported by AI images instead of stock images that should not be problem. Especially if images are contextual. I have seen good blogging platforms like hackernoon give an option to generate cover image via their AI.

The key to Ai is treating it like an employee - Virtual assistant.

With the right prompting you can get Ai to pass all Ai detection software.

The real problem that I see in the Ai is being use as a short cut instead of a new path.

For example on the X platform people love to write Ai generated comments. They are easy to detect and tend to upset people. That's a shortcut.

The new path is to take a comment string along with the original post and have Ai detect the tone of the comments and then building a framework around that to create a comment that will get engagement. On viral posts this is a great way to get engagement because you can create a comment that touches everyone in the comments section. It works great. Instead of having to read all the comments let Ai do it.

I can only speak for myself but I gotta say havin a bit of caution really can't hurt. I saw an article in passing saying something about the government finally made a ruling on copyright in music via AI. I can't find it but I point it out to say that their will be regulation it just takes time.

Beyond that it can accelerate learning and massively boost productivity if used correctly. I would say it's becoming a very important tool but no you shouldn't lean on it to do your thinking for you. The more effort you put in the better quality output you receive even on the free tiers. Just put all your creative juice into the work and AI will amplify it. Left alone, AI will just regurgitate and plagiarize with reckless abandon. lmao

I still don't get this. Whenever you can not know the difference in between AI and human generated content, so what is wrong with it?

Soon, we will all think every AI generated thing is human produced already. Even though I wouldn't enjoy the robot generated things when it comes to games, art, music etc. It wouldn't have any spirit.

What I've noticed is this: AI itself isn't the problem it's the intent behind how it's used.

Platforms like Google and YouTube don't necessarily hate AI...

they just reward originality, context, and effort. And right now, most AI content out there feels like copy-paste fluff not because AI is bad, but because most people don't push it beyond the first draft.

Think of AI like a creative assistant with no taste.

It can draft, brainstorm, remix but it's up to us to direct it, challenge it, and polish the final output.

From what you shared, it sounds like Google's demotion of your AI content wasn't just "AI = bad," but likely "this content feels generic, repetitive, or low-E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trust)." Especially with SGE rolling out, Google's sniffing harder than ever for authenticity.

One thing that's worked for me:

Use AI for first-pass structure and ideation
Inject real examples, unique POV, and personal context
Run it through AI detection tools before publishing
Add audio/video elements when possible for real signals

Also, the drop in YouTube reach for AI footage is super interesting and aligns with what I've seen too.

Human faces and real motion just feel more engaging to viewers, and the algorithm knows it.

Bottom line: AI isn't a shortcut it's a starting point.

When we treat it like a collaborator rather than a replacement, the results (and rankings) reflect that.

There's really no need to avoid AI anymore even Google is aware of that. Two years ago, Google used to penalize AI-generated content, but back then, the content truly felt robotic and low quality. Now, things are changing in every way.

I've noticed the same thing with AI images too. It's wild how much more reach real or heavily-edited content gets. Looks like authenticity still matters to the algorithms!

It is okay to use AI generated content but I feel like it is taking away our creative ability. people now go for the easy way and they do not want to crack their brains to produce an awesome creative piece and this is the challenges we are facing with the AI invention

I have never really noticed that because honestly you can prompt AI to give you content that feels very human. in esence learning AI ia important . i recommend taking AI courses to help you prompt AI to give you quality contention

very intresting point of view , heres my controvertial take . i believe big tech companies are trying to reduce the level of AI generated content to
1, reduce the level of AI ependency
2, encourage authentic post

Yep, I can confirm -- Google and YouTube really push back on AI-generated content if it's not properly edited. These days I only use AI as a helper, not the main creator. And the results are way better.

People always ask if it's okay to use AI content. Legally, yeah... it's fine. You own what you make. But the real issue is how it performs.

I used AI content on my websites before. At first, traffic went up, then crashed. Google doesn't like AI text or images much. Same thing on YouTube Shorts, AI clips get almost no views, but real footage? Boom, it gets pushed.

Now I always mix AI stuff with real content and do a lot of editing. Also, I use turis vpn to stay safe online and test how my stuff looks in other countries.

So yeah, AI's useful. But do bare in mind, just don't rely on it 100%.

Yes, I found that too. Whether it is pictures, videos or texts, it seems that as long as it is detected that AI is written, it will be resisted by Google and other platforms.

Have you checked their Veo3 model and videos generated by it, they are simply indifferentiable.

And I think they have told people long time ago that content must have EEAT (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness) factors, doesn't matter the content is created with AI or Not with AI.

EEAT matters a lot in content for Google. If you see your rankings dropped here are the possible reasons::

1. Your content must be outdated

2. Content might be out performed by competitors

3. It lacks EEAT

it is definitely ok but i think that if we advance, there should be regulatory laws for the use of AI in our daily lives.

People are using it for sure, however you have to be smart about it.. Perhaps, you could use AI sources, but mix them with human ones as well? Or define a custom workflow which is not as easily detectable?

As a side note, i have seen some plain ridiculous AI vids reach 100M+ views haha.

Have you tried mixing non AI with the AI stuff?

I used AI to create 1000s of images that I use in PDFs for speech therapy. There is no way I could ever have afforded to hire an artist - sad but true.

you should not do your business thinking AI will replace any real work you need to do. Why would someone pay for a pdf done in chatgpt if they can do the same themselves? The idea is to have something that offers more value, something that is more unique than just things served with AI.
Now you can alway pass the content generated through an AI to make sure it does not show as AI.
Make an effort to create human content products and services, use AI as a tool and you will see things will work out fine.

Tried AI tools for content and honestly, it saved me tons of time. Still tweaking stuff, but great for drafts and ideas. Cool tech for sure

Yes, while there are not issues with AI Generated content or images. I also use AudioModify for my youtube chaneel.

Thanks for this question I too had this same question

I've heard similar things about Google preferring human-edited content for SEO. Interesting that YouTube seems to treat AI visuals the same way.

Absolutely not. Google has tools to detect textual spam, but not AI-generated content. Unfortunately, your prompts were not good, so garbage content was generated - a sure way to end up in Google's void. Your site has been penalized for spam, not for AI

People use AI wrong. They follow the herd and think short prompts work

On certain projects I use AI as part of the writing process. Last week I created a 1,500 word post using nothing but AI prompts and some audio notes. To be fair it has taken me months to refine the prompts. Now it works. I can create long reads in very little time. I have tested my work. People who know my writing think I wrote it. The thing is I did, but AI did it for me.

The secret to AI is training. Simply prompting "do this" or "act like this" will get you nothing special. Training and adding context gets results.

I am currently humanizing some AI content for a client. I can not believe they had such sh!t on their website. I am enjoying this project as it provides training material for my own projects.

I am interested to see the quality of AI generated content. Especially if people still have the prompts they used to create it.

very informative content

This is the topic I am interested in, very useful thank you for sharing another useful information

Janno what jus' happined to Moi?

I had a kinda déjà vu.

But it warn't like I saw ... yeah, I seen this before, sowin' it is BEFORE!

It was more NEVAH SEEN THIS EVAH! -- same time I knew instant I nevah didn't ain't.

Gotta distinguish always buttween nouveau reflectshchwaans on the imponderabyoolo an' impossibyool consequences of the inevitabyool, I guess.

That is how I showah, u wanna know.

Drench against flesh.

& then you gotta

dry ahf

or drip ovah nowan.

(Less'n you gaht a déjà vu says sumthin' else -- hey, but that's jus' Moi cookin' UNINCINERATED WHATEVAH for guests said hey mebbe second time won't kill us all too bad.)

Yeah so ima all 'Whores an' Desperados' rn -- like it is evin a Disney movie fulla all yr swanksyest supah stars.

The Rock cuts in:

"Cut out the dependence on hairstyle smarts! You can rule the planet on that impossible supernexus we call MUSCLES + LUCK. Most athletes and movie stars pack just one of either. But I've got like eight of each. Go see me tomorrow at your local movie theater. And maybe jism on out upon command."

My view?

It has always been impossibyool to say for shoore what may proliferate beyond alla our wishes, like we all senityoore of the Caahsmaas on out.

But mebbe that is a coolah refrince point than perpetyool schwangomusho.

Would You Wish This Momentary déjà vu 'pon Yrself No Time Soon, O Princess?

Long as I can choose muh own undahgarments, we perpetyooly gtg on this ticket, Sweetiepoppets.

I have had similar experience
Original/human content >> AI content

AI has saved me a lot of time in my work

Hi everyone,

AI creation is a great tool for speeding up content production, but combining it with human editing ensures quality and a natural voice. Staying updated on platform guidelines, like Google's focus on E-E-A-T, helps your content stay credible and visible. Thoughtful use of AI plus human input gives the best results.

Using AI creations is fine for personal use, but risky for online growth. Search engines and social platforms prefer original, human-made content. AI text and images can hurt visibility because algorithms detect and down-rank them. If you use AI, always rewrite, edit, or mix it with real content. For best results, keep your main creative work authentic, AI should only assist, net replace you.

Yes, you are correct. I tested both AI videos and real videos on my channel. The AI videos got very few views, but the real footage still attracts a lot of attention.

I used AI-generated content on a site a couple of years ago and most of the pages were initially indexed but after a month, the pages were no longer indexed. It was good to learn this before getting too far into completing more projects like this.

The problem isn't just "using AI," but using it without providing any sign of authenticity or real-world experience. As far as I understand, no platform will penalize you for using AI; they penalize generic content, content without its own value and, of course, without any indication of the author. If you publish text exactly as GPT generates it, it's normal for it to get dropped because you're not contributing anything unique to the index. Something quite similar happens with images and videos; YouTube prioritizes content generated by "real engagement." The solution isn't to avoid AI, but simply to integrate it, use it as a draft, rewrite thoroughly, and add your own personal, real-world examples.

Naturally, "human" text is more important for Google, but AI text is also perceived.

it's up to you to choose what you prefer