Margarita Loktionova’s Post

There shouldn't be any stigma in using AI to help you write faster or better. I use it to write better captions for social media. I write the first draft, edit it, then use AI to make it catchier and more concise (not every time), and then I edit again to make it sound like me. It's like having a second opinion. It's still me coming up with ideas and doing the bulk of the work.

Same stance as yours. AI augments a writer's work in so many ways. These tools take care of basic stuff so writers can focus on more important things. Like every automation works. On the one hand, the world is going berserk about how AI has new use cases every day, but content is the only field where AI is being seen as some kind of villain.

I fully agree with your stance. AI is a tool that can be used to assist with great content production, or it can be misused to create terrible content. Generally speaking, AI-generated content with no human intervention will be bad, but even that depends on how much thought and effort goes into the prompt. AI can help great writers produce even better content. It can also help bad writers produce good content. On the flipside, it can help lazy writers produce bad content. It all depends how you use it. Like you said - if you use it responsibly, then it's a great tool.

Okay, I’m thinking as I type, so bear with me. In general, I agree. It can speed up the workflow without losing the human touch. But the entire point of AI is that it learns from experience. So we’re teaching it how to better prepare to create content. Right? Which means, at some point, it will probably get a lot better at creating content. And we’ve already seen a huge downturn in content jobs, largely due to AI (I think I read that in an Semrush report). So are we actively training the tool that’s essentially built to replace us? I mean yes, people who understand good writing will always see the advantage of human writers. But so, so many people find largely AI-generated content to be “good enough.” Even if we disagree as content professionals. Will that number keep going up? These are the questions that always come up for me in this discussion. Would love to hear your thoughts!

I agree with your overall point, Margarita! It's clear that AI doesn't automatically = low-quality content. The human in the driver's seat has control over how and when to use AI to improve their process and outputs. But I disagree with your first point that refusing to use AI for content creation = backwards thinking. This point feels very different to me than what you speak to in the rest of the post. People who choose not to use AI do so for an array of reasons. For me, it's because I don't as yet see any benefit to my process. If someone has a killer, tested process that they're happy with, it surely isn't "backwards thinking" for them to forego a new technology just because it's there. Again, though, I agree that for those who use it and use it well, we shouldn't be assuming that the outcomes will be low quality. Thanks for the post!

I agree with you Margarita I'm slowly accepting using AI in my content creation process. It is all about what you use the AI for. I use to brainstorm, look for unique angles, get blindspots I ought to have covered in my content that I didn't etc. When used well, AI can actually help you come up with a more quality content. What I'm averse to is letting AI do the writing for you and submitting such work.

💯 The anti-AI sentiment is understandable. It's based in fear. But people really should understand the bigger picture: AI has been around for many years, improving their daily lives, and proclaiming "I'm against AI!" is like shouting "I'm against triangle shapes on tread!" when AI experts are like "But AI is the whole shoe..."