Will AI hurt SEO?

[Jason]

Neil Patel, the SEO guru, says no. He says that AI, at it's best, would still need human editors because the results that are given are too imperfect. Well, do you think that could be fixed and, of course, that wouldn't be good for human jobs?

Myself, I am a bit cynical. I mean, I've seen AI do quite a bit of magic and even though I've seen a major blunder, it could probably be fixed.

Final Thoughts​

Have you used AI in connection with any website? Would you consider using it for SEO in any fashion? How might that play out? Do you feel AI produces stuff that is as good as with humans? In detail, can you give examples of what I asked?

 

[Empire]

In my personal opinion, Search algorithms are based on user search queries. I think that AI is good at making assumptions about what would match said queries, but the real practice of SEO is analysing the results of your SEO and forming strategies based on the data. I wouldn't say chat gpt would able to be consistent in the constant changes of the Google algorithms, but if you were to build your own very complex AI that automates the process based on human psychology, then maybe.

 

[Arantor]

Given how quickly AI can produce new pages, it doesn’t seem unreasonable that AI will drown out real content.

Google has admitted they’re having trouble filtering out AI content for this reason.

 

[Jason]

Given how quickly AI can produce new pages, it doesn’t seem unreasonable that AI will drown out real content.

Google has admitted they’re having trouble filtering out AI content for this reason.

In other words, Google doesn't like it. Well, that's good news.

 

[Foster]

He's got a point – AI is cool, but it's not perfect. He says it needs human editors to fix its quirks. I've messed around with AI for website stuff – it's handy for things like keywords, but you still need a human touch to keep things real. Jobs? Yeah, it's a worry, but finding a middle ground where AI and humans team up seems like the sweet spot.

 

[Uncrowned]

AI has been a tool for writers and content creators and that is the best way to put it for SEO. AI has the ability to help generate better meta descriptions, titles, etc, but it is still based on the content and the author to provide the best content for the AI to help improve.

I personally feel like filtering out AI generated content is a lost battle as we can't do it now and it will only get harder to outright impossible in a rapidly short amount of time.

However, I am a huge fan of the other side of AI SEO and Google being able to use AI to determine if content is good for the user. This is a major factor with SEO as Google has always tried to create a system that pulls the best results, but admins have always cheesed the system to get SEO focused, content poor articles and pages to the top of the results. Algorithms can't fix that, but AI that is actually reading the content might.

 

[Arantor]

AI is algorithms, though.

And Google is currently being drowned in vapid, unnecessary AI created drivel for the sake of a few bucks.

 

[Shawn Gossman]

It won't hurt it.

It definitely will change it.

It's a good idea to learn AI and how it can help you stay ahead.

If you hate AI and refuse to use and learn it, you'll likely get left behind in terms of SEO and marketing. Sadly, that's the case and it shows us the proof with technology and social media evolution. Many forum owners refuse to market on social media and miss a lot of opportunities. If you don't stick with the times, you miss out.

 

[JoshB]

I think AI is useful as a tool that you can use to spice up a post or create a keyword listing in which you have the final editor's say on it. For the SEO aspect of things, AI didn't create the problem we see over the past few years, it was people stuffing articles for SEO returns which in turn creates the mess we're seeing today with search results being almost useless.

 

[Nomad]

A lot of people assume that AI is bad for SEO, but I have never found any concerete proof. Once adsense approved my website with 50 percent AI content, so I guess AI does not harm your website

 

[Arantor]

A lot of people assume that AI is bad for SEO, but I have never found any concerete proof. Once adsense approved my website with 50 percent AI content, so I guess AI does not harm your website

For now. Google has made it clear it doesn’t want to ingest AI content so if it figures out it’s AI content, expect to be demonetised and/or delisted entirely.

Creating content with AI for monetisation is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

 

[Joeychgo]

Trick will be when AI figures out the ranking algorithm

 

[Arantor]

Trick will be when AI figures out the ranking algorithm

Don’t worry, Google will have added AI to it by then so it’ll be an arms race ultimately decided by spending on advertising. So, like now but worse.

 

[Nomad]

For now. Google has made it clear it doesn’t want to ingest AI content so if it figures out it’s AI content, expect to be demonetised and/or delisted entirely.

Creating content with AI for monetisation is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Can you point me to the page where Google specifically says, it does not want to ingest AI content?
Using AI content for monetizing website was an experiment, I wasn't trying to solve anything.

 

[Arantor]

Maybe I was a bit broad. However, the first search I do yields an interesting point which is exactly the one I’ve been maintaining this whole time about volume production.

Google Search's guidance about AI-generated content | Google Search Central Blog | Google for Developers

In this post, we'll share more about how AI-generated content fits into our long-standing approach to show helpful content to people on Search.

developers.google.com

Using automation—including AI—to generate content with the primary purpose of manipulating ranking in search results is a violation of our spam policies.

Which is entirely in line with my earlier commentary.

Additionally, I have yet to see any strong evidence that AI radically supports the production of EEAT content which is the current backbone of Google policy - they don’t want content tuned for search engines (which is literally what SEO is by its own definition) but tuned for people, in content that demonstrates “experience, expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness”, something AI cannot currently do.

(And spare me the lecture on how great AI is, it’s an infinite random regurgitation machine. It doesn’t *understand* anything. I have followed the technology, I understand the technical principles at work, it is not entirely a magic box to me.)

 

[Sykes]

While AI can help identify effective keywords and topics, it cannot replace the creative process of developing high-quality, engaging content.

 

[Jason]

While AI can help identify effective keywords and topics, it cannot replace the creative process of developing high-quality, engaging content.

Well, that could be debatable. Iv'e seen some smart AI chatbots on that Lil Rawkers forum. They're really amazing.