-
Do you even bother with AI Content detectors like zerogpt?
Posted by on December 3, 2025 at 5:04 pmI have published 20 articles written by AI, with some edit where needed. These ranks and give me traffic.
Im using Claude FYI, found it not to write cringy hooks and posts overall much better writer.
But should you even bother checking your content for AI?
Is it even reliable? I mean, one of my articles I wrote 10 years ago got flagged for AI.
Aren't these tools specifically for teachers to check for AI in homeworks etc.?
-
1 Reply
-
Not totally sure, but after one of Google’s algorithm updates, sites with mostly AI-generated content have seen a big drop in rankings
-
Google does not care if your content is written by AI. So no, I don’t bother checking.
-
>These ranks and give me traffic.
Because Google is content agnostic.
It tests whether the user likes the content or not.
Also, Google welcomes AI content in its AI Content policy for SEO.
>But should you even bother checking your content for AI?
>Is it even reliable?
No & No
-
I’ve had AI content deindexed by Google.
Then I rewritten it myself (100% human) and now its indexed.
I don’t know the “right” answer to the question, but I do my own tests and go from there……
-
While you can get a sense of your indexed AI answers on any SEO platform, and see referral traffic from AE sources in GA4 the true value in AI/AEO is that users can ask one-off completely unique questions and discover your brand.
There is no metric to track some idiot who asks a poorly worded question that leads him to learn about your brand
-
My boss wants zero AI, but probably because he wants to make sure I DO PROPER RESEARCH. In just a month, we were able to rank a high-competition-keyword blog, but I’m guessing even if my content has some AI, it would still rank.
-
Detectors not really reliable; I only use them to polish details that feel forced if an article is very long, or after using an AiHumanizer
-
I just used AISpamDetector to detect that your post is spam
-
no, they’re not reliable
-
Google mentioned AI content is acceptable.
-
Doesn’t matter for ranking, but you don’t want your audience to suspect you are using AI with too many em dashes, or common phrases like “in the realm of, or in the world of, etc.”
Use it as much as you like, but don’t make it sound generic.
-
Lately I have seen several ads on IG claiming that their blog services that uses AI to generate blog posts.
So those tools basically generate blog posts by itself and you pay by the month. They host the blog and they allow you to use your domain. What do you specifically think about that? Will AI analysis/generation be efficient or may it as well tank my domain authority?
One tool I have laid my eyes on is called BlogDog, maybe that helps you give me a more educated reply.
-
Those detectors really aren’t reliable for SEO work. Search engines care more about quality and relevance than whether it’s flagged, so if your content ranks and brings traffic, I wouldn’t waste time running it through tools meant for classrooms.
-
*Theories* of mine that seem to be consistently proven out in our tests-
1. Google publicly will say one thing and do another, especially when the things impact stock prices. (Google can’t acknowledge an anti-AI stance publicly and so masquerades their stances as being about quality evaluations, regardless of who/what created the content).
2. Google will rank AI content for a time. AI content ranks better, longer, when part of a mix of human created content (historically or present day), and when part of a site for an established brand with healthy reputation/authority.
3. Google will often de-rank AI content. This occurs often enough that using it at scale is risky. The risk of deranking increases as the volume of content that is AI produced increases.
4. It takes time for Google to fingerprint patterns in AI content models which helps obfuscate Google’s stance on AI content.
5. Human editing seems to help avoid 3.
-
[removed]
Log in to reply.