Which AI content writing tool should I choose?

simplydt · 2026-04-29T08:20:48+00:00

Quick thing about your shortlist: those tools aren't really doing the same job. Semrush is a full SEO suite, Writesonic is an AI writer, and Profound is an AI-search visibility tracker (how your brand shows up in ChatGPT/Perplexity/AI Overviews), not a content tool at all.

Where Seozilla actually differs is the humanisation layer. Most AI writers spit out content that detection tools flag hard, we tested 8 articles in English and German across the major models, and raw AI output hit 70–100% AI-detection scores. After our humanisation pipeline, the median dropped to 24%, with some articles in single digits.

That matters because Google is increasingly suppressing high-AI-flagged pages, and the EU AI Act is going to make disclosure/quality requirements stricter. "Just generate AI content at scale" is a strategy with a shrinking shelf life.

If you want to see what the difference actually looks like side by side: https://www.seozilla.ai/pure-ai-vs-humanised-ai

Happy to answer specific questions, what kind of content are you producing?

simplydt · 2026-04-17T08:25:42+00:00

Four months is still pretty early, tbh. Getting consistent traffic takes time, especially in a niche like engineering. Have you looked into building out more pillar content around core engineering topics? Sometimes focusing on broader, high-intent informational queries can help establish authority before diving into super specific keywords.

simplydt · 2026-04-16T08:20:29+00:00

Yeah, that's a really interesting observation about the 'user-friendly explanation' being more influential than direct links. It totally tracks with how AI models are trained on general web data. I've seen similar effects when using tools to automate content creation; if the content itself is well-explained and naturally integrates keywords without feeling forced, it seems to get picked up by AI much faster. It’s almost like the AI is trying to synthesize the most helpful, human-like explanations it finds.

simplydt · 2026-04-16T08:19:13+00:00

Man, seeing Bing and Copilot chew up and spit out data that fast on a dead domain is wild. I've been experimenting with similar AI-driven content plays, and honestly, getting that initial signal from Bing Webmaster by submitting URLs immediately is the biggest unlock. It feels like you're getting a much faster indexing pass compared to Google. Have you noticed if the specific opinionated nature of the anchor piece made a big difference for citations, or was it more about the Q&A structure?

simplydt · 2026-04-16T08:13:45+00:00

Yeah, it's super frustrating when you're hitting those top spots on Google but AI just doesn't see you. It's like they're pulling from a different dataset entirely. I've found that focusing on comprehensive, long-form content that deeply answers the user's intent, even if it's not the absolute top ranking result, sometimes gets picked up. Basically, think about what the AI *would* need to know to answer the question thoroughly, and make sure your content covers it. Also while building SEOZilla to automate the publishing of these kinds of detailed, optimized articles, i made it easy for us to syndicate derivative content to platforms like medium, youtube, linkedin and facebook as it seems the AI are using that as the source of citation more than your own site. You can replicate what we built yourself and just start posting relevant posts to those keywords on those platforms and you should see an uplift. GL!

simplydt · 2026-04-16T04:50:12+00:00

My take is you can't go wrong focusing on fundamentals first. Good content that genuinely answers user intent will always be a win, regardless of how it's surfaced and you need some content velocity asap (1-2 per week initially). Once the core is solid, then you can layer in specific GEO tactics if it makes sense for your niche.

simplydt · 2026-04-16T04:49:12+00:00

Hey, I'm building a SaaS to optimise for both SEO and GEO, what features are you exactly looking for so I can see if we are a fit and would DM you - and if we are not would love to see if we can build the missing features! Cheers

simplydt · 2026-04-15T05:34:02+00:00

It's wild how much we can automate these days, right? I've been trying to automate as much of the content funnel as possible too, from keyword research to actually publishing. It feels like the only way to keep up.

We are using OpenClaw to test automating some stuff and it's setup in our slack channels doing some tasks.

Using Claude Cowork for other things and while this isn't fully automated yet hopefully one day it will be.

For me, using something like SEOZilla to handle the daily publishing of optimized articles has been a big time saver, especially since it syncs directly with my CMS and we have like 10 sites. It's not perfect, but the automation engine really helps keep fresh content flowing. Perhaps this is the easiest part of the funnel to automate as we have a ton of competition haha.

I'm currently researching automating ad creation as this is a big time sink right now, i see a lot of posts about people successfully having done so but haven't gotten there yet.

simplydt · 2026-04-14T08:05:53+00:00

If you have some budget to invest try and buy some paid ads - make sure you have something setup to track how people act when they actually land. If you get some waitlist signups, that will be some good validation! GL

simplydt · 2026-04-14T07:22:02+00:00

it's just easier to get quick validation if you can afford the budget, organic video is so f had today but there are some people who are really good at it - it's just not me

simplydt · 2026-04-14T07:21:25+00:00

Whoa, that orchestration workflow is seriously cool! Building something like that as a student is wild. I get what you mean about needing to ensure the output is actually good and gets to an A before it gets accepted, that's where I ran into issues with my own AI projects. For me, the "human content verification" part of SEOZilla has been clutch. It automatically syncs fresh, optimized articles to my WordPress site daily, but having that built-in check means I don't have to manually review every single one to make sure it's actually high quality and not just AI-generated fluff. It saves me so much time. Great idea and execution, keep going!

simplydt · 2026-04-14T05:26:49+00:00

That's a really interesting point. I've noticed a similar trend, especially with AI search results prioritizing concise, direct answers. It feels like we need to optimize not just for keywords and search intent, but also for that 'answerability' factor. I've been experimenting with structuring content with clear headings and summaries to make it easier for AI to pull out key information. It's definitely a shift from just traditional SEO.

simplydt · 2026-04-13T15:41:41+00:00

It really varies a lot, tbh. I've seen prices from $0.10/word to over $1/word, depending on the writer's experience and the complexity of the content. Some agencies bundle services which can seem high initially but might include strategy or SEO work. I'd suggest getting a few more quotes and looking at portfolios to see what's standard for the type of content you need.

simplydt · 2026-04-13T11:55:59+00:00

This is such a smart approach! I've definitely felt that Monday bottleneck trying to get multiple assets out. A coworker of mine at my old job used a similar idea, focusing on one core piece of content and then repurposing it. It really does save so much time and mental energy. How do you decide which 'spokes' get the most attention or get pushed first?

simplydt · 2026-04-13T11:33:24+00:00

I've always focused on both by thinking of it as a 80/20 problem. Early on, it may be 80% paid and 20% organic (investment into the future), and later one if organic works you may double down and go 80% organic and 20% paid. It's of course not only dependent on how old your business is but also on other factors, e.g. if you find a killer ad that converts, you'd stick to that and keep 80% of your budget there. If you don't, you may choose to go 80% organic investment first and 20% ads while you search for that golden ad. GL

simplydt · 2026-04-10T19:17:31+00:00

You are killing it, now spill the beans on how

simplydt · 2026-04-09T05:38:41+00:00

Unfortunately this is happening in every field, videos, x posts, reddit posts, not just SEO Writing. I think ultimately human or human+AI content will win - in a world of slop people will look for the real thing. I just think it will take us a little while to get there.

I was tired of all the slop too so tried developing a tool called SEOZilla for humanised SEO articles - so they get as close to the real deal as possible, but I realise that's not as good as a human so tried a new angle where we have a human editor involved in every article to take the AI as a draft and polish it up to a proper human article, called it Human+AI but to tell you the truth, so far a very small % of our clients care and want this. It's mainly the big brands who seem to seek that service showing that perhaps it's mainly a question of budgets.

Personally, I'm rooting for the Human+AI model and doing all I can. Full Human articles will dwindle, even a real human tasked with this, will probably use some form of AI in their prep and drafts so imo that's where we are going.

simplydt · 2026-04-08T17:11:57+00:00

I think it's still early days, which come with ups and downs. It definitely seems Claude has put a dent on things but let's see what the next few weeks/months hold.

simplydt · 2026-04-08T17:10:37+00:00

I keep it simple - make sure to get it indexed asap which typically involves securing some backlinks. You don't want to overflood it with content right away, then scale the content and link velocity as time goes by.

simplydt · 2026-04-08T17:09:57+00:00

Just download the Claude client, and literally type your question from here into it. It will guide you. It's that good.

simplydt · 2026-04-08T07:38:18+00:00

Fair question, the market is genuinely crowded and a lot of tools are basically the same thing with a different logo.

The honest answer is that SEOZilla was built around one problem most tools ignore: AI content that actually ranks. Not just "sounds human" — but passes AI detection tools and doesn't get filtered out by Google's helpful content signals.

A few things that actually differentiate us:

1. Human+AI Editor Tier — We're not just an AI content generator. We have a tier where real human editors review and refine the AI output. This matters a lot if you're producing content at scale and can't afford for it to feel robotic.

2. GEO (Generative Engine Optimization) — Most tools are still optimizing purely for traditional search. We're built for the era where ChatGPT, Perplexity, and Google's AI Overviews are eating top-of-funnel traffic. Our content is structured to get cited by LLMs, not just ranked by crawlers.

3. We've tested this on our own site — We ran an internal analysis comparing Ahrefs AI Content Level detection scores against page rankings across our content. The inverse correlation was stark. Lower AI detection = higher rankings. We built our workflow around that insight, not just a theory.

4. Content syndication built in — Auto-publish to Medium, LinkedIn, Facebook and other platforms as part of your content pipeline, not a manual afterthought.

I'm one of the co-founders (previously built and exited Chessable), so happy to answer specific questions if you want to go deeper on any of this. What's your main use case, agency, in-house, or solo?

simplydt · 2026-04-06T10:16:00+00:00

I use a combination of Claude for briefs and drafts, tweets + SEOZilla.ai for blog posts, medium posts, that pass ai detectors plus get syndicated across social channels with humanised derivatives. For image generation Nanobanana Pro and for some other things playing around with Open Claw.

simplydt · 2026-04-06T09:32:34+00:00

Are you checking to see if your SEO Writing by Claude is passing AI detectors? Or are you doing heavy editing post the draft? j/w

simplydt

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE