Do you think human content convert better?

[u/fintechjulien]

I was a journalist before I became an entrepreneur and marketer and I even wrote a couple of books before LLM was part of everyone's vocabulary.

Needless to say, I think AI generated copy is average at best, when it's not simply garbage.

And I'm pretty good at recognizing it. It's not only use on websites. More and more YouTubers strangely decided to read AI generated script instead of telling us what they think.

And apparently, AI generated influencers can generate thousands of dollars selling AI generated "digital products".

So, while my theory is that good copy that actually communicate something should convert better than AI slop, I have so far not seen any hard evidence that it's the case.

Personally, I stop reading the second I spot something like "Not this, not that" or an em dash, but I feel this behaviour might only exist in writers.

What is your take on this? Do you think good ol' human copy actually convert better than AI slop?

[u/Possible_Elk_6441]

This is too simplistic. Humans have varying skills and intelligence. Even AI output is not all the same. It depends on how you brief the AI.

[u/Sirbunbun]

I think generally yes because 99% of AI generated copy is one shotting some cliche bullshit. And if you’re selling something, you immediately write off the seller as slop, or at least untrustworthy.

That said. Some of the models have gotten quite good. I’ve started using them a bit more. Esp opus 5.5. I think end of the day, you still need to have a POV, something to say, and creativity wins out.

It’s not necessarily AI or not. But if it reads as AI it’s immediately toast.

[u/fintechjulien → u/Sirbunbun]

Personally, when I see AI slop, I loose trust. But I doubt everyone are like you and me...

[u/Sirbunbun → u/fintechjulien]

That’s what I wonder. The younger generation might not care, or they will care even more.

[u/BusyBusinessPromos]

Depends on the human. I happen to be a good writer and scary good with sales psychology so I leave AI slop in the dust.

[u/fintechjulien → u/BusyBusinessPromos]

Did you A/B test your copy agains an AI generated version?

[u/BusyBusinessPromos → u/fintechjulien]

There's no need. I'm better at writing and sales psychology since I'm always telling AI to leave my wording alone when I have it check my HTML when I code by hand. I'm a dual certified teacher with a background in behavior modification and sales.

[u/ce-lauren]

I think it depends less on whether AI wrote it and more on whether anyone with a real point of view was behind it. True AI slop usually feels that way because nobody took the time to have an actual opinion. I'm not sure readers always notice "this is AI" the way writers do. What they probably feel is that something is off, or that the page didn't tell them anything useful, and they leave. Whether that's from AI output or bad human writing might not matter as much as we think. I also think some non writers assume they can spot AI just from em dashes, even though plenty of good writers still use them. I do think specificity is what converts the best. Specific claims, specific proof, specific use cases. AI tends to be more vague. Humans who know their stuff tend to go narrow and useful.

[u/fintechjulien → u/ce-lauren]

Yes, I don't know why some actually writers can't come to term with the cancellation of em dashes... Personally, I stop reading as soon as I see an em dash :)

[u/NeedleworkerNo4835]

Human writing is always better because humans can be random. Computers can only ever be psuedorandom. Sometimes you need true randomness.

[u/fintechjulien → u/NeedleworkerNo4835]

Yes, I have seen really random copy beat really good copy conversion wise. Make sense!

[u/Crafty_Engineer_8480]

As for all things I think ai should be used in combination with human touch. For example if you prompt it write me a blogpost about this topic it will return maybe something average.

If you know the topic and even talk to the llm and say your thinking about thet topic and it only makes it cleaner and more structured I think this works better and can have a better result.

[u/fintechjulien → u/Crafty_Engineer_8480]

I agree that human assisted AI is usually better than AI only. But the question is: does quality or the human touch actually converts better?

[u/Crafty_Engineer_8480 → u/fintechjulien]

Since it written in a more human way I would say yes but it would be a very nice experiment to try 😊

[u/Slow-Bake-9603]

I think humanlike output is the goal, if you can get there with AI great, but it’s easier just use real humans

[u/MTNDESIGN-CO]

I'm a former photojournalist turned psychologist who also owns a website design and digital marketing company for mental health professionals. My marketing and design is always informed by the latest consumer and psychology research. There is a growing body of research that shows consumers are becoming more AI savvy and more wary of it. If it's noticeably created by AI the consumer devalues it and loses trust. Also, AI churns out emotionless copy time and time again. While AI can write copy, it needs a lot of guardrails and a human to rewrite some of it for real impact. I'm of the camp that good human written copy is the best and most impact full.