{"id":7685,"date":"2023-01-12T15:47:48","date_gmt":"2023-01-12T15:47:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/craighordlow.com\/index.php\/2023\/01\/12\/google-search-responds-to-bankrate-more-brands-using-ai-to-write-content\/"},"modified":"2023-01-12T15:47:48","modified_gmt":"2023-01-12T15:47:48","slug":"google-search-responds-to-bankrate-more-brands-using-ai-to-write-content","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/craighordlow.com\/index.php\/2023\/01\/12\/google-search-responds-to-bankrate-more-brands-using-ai-to-write-content\/","title":{"rendered":"Google search responds to BankRate, more brands using AI to write content"},"content":{"rendered":"

Artificial intelligence has been a scorching hot topic lately, especially since the launch of ChatGPT Nov. 30. Microsoft Bing has plans<\/a> to add ChatGPT to search. Some have questioned whether it\u2019s a Google killer.<\/p>\n

Now we\u2019re seeing more examples of brands using AI-generated content. Bankrate is the latest example. It is having some of its content written by machines but reviewed by human editors. <\/p>\n

It\u2019s a bold strategy. And the SEO community wanted to know Google\u2019s policies around these efforts.<\/p>\n

Bankrate example. <\/strong>The example was highlighted by Tony Hill, who posted<\/a> on Twitter that \u201cBankRate.com, one of the largest finance sites on the web has now started using AI to write some of its content. A big moment in web publishing and SEO.\u201d <\/p>\n

The screenshot reads \u201cthis article was generated using automated technology and thoroughly edited and fact-checked by an editor on our editorial staff.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

Bankrate isn\u2019t the only example of this. CreditCards.com is also using AI-generated content. And CNET has quietly been using AI<\/a> to write entire articles from the ground up since November. <\/p>\n

Do a Google site search for [\u201cThis article was generated using automation technology\u201d<\/a>] will reveal dozens of CNET articles in Google\u2019s index. CNET also assures readers that these articles have been \u201cthoroughly edited and fact-checked by an editor on our editorial staff.\u201d<\/p>\n

The potential issue. <\/strong>If we can have machines and AI write content for us, then the amount of content that can be produced at incredibly low costs can be somewhat exciting for brands and businesses \u2013 more content for a minimal investment sounds like the stuff of dreams. <\/p>\n

But, at the same time, mass-generated AI content can also frightening for consumers (what should you spend your time reading?) and search engines (what content should Google be ranking in search?).<\/p>\n

So much content is being produced daily already; how much more can we consume, and how much more does Google need to crawl, index, and decide to rank for a given query?<\/p>\n

Google\u2019s statement on AI-generated content. <\/strong>Is Google OK with crawling and ranking content written by machines? If not, is Google OK if those AI-generated pieces of content are reviewed by human editors before they are published?<\/p>\n

Danny Sullivan, Google\u2019s Search Liason, reiterated<\/a> some of what was said before about Google\u2019s stance on this topic. <\/p>\n

Sullivan wrote<\/a> on Twitter this morning on the topic of AI-generated content, \u201ccontent created primarily for search engine rankings, however it is done, is against our guidance.\u201d But he added that \u201cif content is helpful & created for people first, that\u2019s not an issue.\u201d<\/p>\n

Sullivan then referenced their guidelines<\/a> for the helpful content update<\/a>, saying that the \u201ckey to being successful with our helpful content system \u2014 and if it\u2019s not helpful content, the system catches that.\u201d <\/p>\n

If the AI can write helpful content, then it should be fine, one would assume. <\/p>\n

Then Sullivan references the revised E-E-A-T quality raters guidelines<\/a>, saying, \u201cFor anyone who uses *any method* to generate a lot content primarily for search rankings, our core systems look at many signals to reward content clearly demonstrating E-E-A-T (experience, expertise, authoritativeness, and trustworthiness).\u201d<\/p>\n

Finally, Google has a spam policy<\/a> for automated content, which states \u201cgenerated through automated processes without regard for quality or user experience\u201d which is against Google\u2019s guidelines.<\/p>\n

Why we care.<\/strong> We know machine-generated content is not new, but what is new, is that the machines are getting better with the help of AI, in generating human-like, high-quality content. The question is, is it being produced with the intent of helping people or ranking in Google Search. If it is the latter, the helpful content system\u2019s aim is to make sure such content does not rank well.<\/p>\n

For the time being, Google wants content\u00a0by the people, for the people<\/a>\u00a0but you can use\u00a0AI for ideas<\/a>\u00a0and help you along the way. If machines and AI can write the content, you\u2019d think similar technology can detect content written by AI.<\/p>\n

The post Google search responds to BankRate, more brands using AI to write content<\/a> appeared first on Search Engine Land<\/a>.<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Artificial intelligence has been a scorching hot topic lately, especially since the launch of ChatGPT Nov. 30. Microsoft Bing has plans to add ChatGPT to search. Some have questioned whether it\u2019s a Google killer. Now we\u2019re seeing more examples of brands using AI-generated content. Bankrate is the latest example. It is having some of its content written by machines but reviewed by human editors. It\u2019s a bold strategy. And the SEO community wanted to know Google\u2019s policies around these efforts. Bankrate example. The example was highlighted […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"h5ap_radio_sources":[],"cybocfi_hide_featured_image":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7685","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-best-seo-blogs"],"featured_image_src":null,"featured_image_src_square":null,"author_info":{"display_name":false,"author_link":"https:\/\/craighordlow.com\/author\/"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/craighordlow.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7685","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/craighordlow.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/craighordlow.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/craighordlow.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7685"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/craighordlow.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7685\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/craighordlow.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7685"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/craighordlow.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7685"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/craighordlow.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7685"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}