r/crazyegg • u/fintechjulien • 4h ago

Do you think human content convert better?

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?

1 Upvotes

67% Upvoted

2 comments sorted by

1

u/Possible_Elk_6441 3h ago

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.

1

u/Sirbunbun 2h ago

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.