Do dedicated “AI SEO Writers” produce better quality than raw ChatGPT/Claude?

[FirstPlaceSEO]

It’s not AI that’s rubbish it’s the persons prompts. You need to first understand how to achieve a desired outcome by first being an expert SEO copywriter and what’s involved then prompt the AI to replicate all steps with checks and safeguards. Each AI responds differently to the same prompts so you need precision as well

[yekedero]

Hard to tell without knowing your prompt.

The output is often based on the prompt, also using the thinking mode.

Garbage in, garbage out.

[WebLinkr]

From a purely SEO perspective, there are two stops to ranking:

Step 1: Algorithmic – does your page havbe the topical authority to rank?

Step 2: Post ranking does your content maintain CTR traction for the position or does it cause the user to search again (which immediately reduces the users first click CTR by 50%

————-

1. Google is content agnostic
2. Post ranking It depends on the user and the content they’re expecting

# Specific Questions

>Even with sharp prompts and providing my existing articles for context/style, the output is never “publishable”

No. Even if you say “You are a 10 year SEO expert” – this doesn’t improve the quality or output.

# LLMs are NOT AI Agents

If you ask an LLM to summarize a particular SEOs views on Reddit for example – all it does is kick off a search in Google or bing. Because search engine’s limit results to 2 per domain per 10 results (typically) – something Google introduced in 1997 – 90% of the content will be off Reddit unless you specifically ask for Reddit. Then – that content will be by anyone with what Google thinks is relevant and in no way influenced by engagement.

tl;dr

your prompt doesnt create an mission that the LLM “agent” then goes off and researches and analyses.

It does a normal google search – e.g. “What is the top advice weblinkr giving on reddit but only from Reddit” = “weblinkr site:reddit.com”

And if you say “You are an SEO and Marketing Professor at Yale with a Phd in Psychology – write the best research paper based on Weblinkr’s teachings from Reddit only” – you get the same source documents – and maybe the LLM will use a different linguistic style.

# General Rules re: Content

There are no guides, examples, hints or suggestions ANYWHERE in Google vast and comprehensive guides to SEO for content structure

You are 100% free to use any word count, layout, structure or style as you see fit. Any attempt by a search engine to “prefer” a style would have immediate ramifications:

* It would stifle communication freedom of speech
* It would stifle innovation in communication
* Would immediately introduce “subjective preferences” into an objective system – you CANNOT do this

For example – since 2010 – we have seen companies significantly step into using colloquial language in advertisements

This is in strong contrast to the formal ‘Content Marketing” community which often holds rigid views on style, grammar, language and structure.

[VillageHomeF]

depends

[PortlandWilliam]

Over a decade of experience on the content side here and I’d say what AI does well is giving you a rough draft to sculpt. It doesn’t give you the sculpture, but it does make it so you don’t need to waste so much clay.

What I’ve found is that experienced copywriters using these tools are blowing past the competition trying to rely on copying and pasting from Claude or Chat. Using SEO knowledge and copywriting experience AND AI is where things level up.

[Adventurous_Wolf6535]

More of a general  question – Will AI slop actually improve your SEO ranking in the first place ?

[tremegorn]

Most AI SEO Writers, even stuff like Jasper are just running a SOTA model on the back end with heavy prompting / customization that’s white labeled.

I don’t think they’re worth it. If you’re struggling with article writing you might look at the prompts you’re using and work from there. Like others said – garbage in, garbage out.