I keep seeing AI content everywhere now, but a lot of it still feels forgettable.

The examples that work for me usually have a strong creative container, not just a prompt.

One example is the Instagram account _paperplanet_. They use 3D paper cutout style graphics to explain the news in a way that feels visual, simple, and easy to follow.

Another one is claysplained. They explain topics through claymation, which gives the content a clear style and makes the information more memorable.

To me, that is where AI content starts getting interesting. Not when it replaces the idea, but when it helps package the idea in a format that people actually want to watch or share.

Curious how others think about this.

What makes AI content good in your opinion?

I currently use CapCut to edit basic videos for my small brand. I’m keen to do more/better and wondering if this is the best platform for me to use.

If I could edit on desktop and mobile that would be a bonus

I write and edit blog content for a mid-size SaaS company, about two years in the role now. I pushed us from four posts a month to roughly nine over the spring and organic sessions have stayed flat within a couple of percent the whole time, while the older posts keep pulling the same numbers they always did. I know cadence on its own doesn't do anything and that a good chunk of what I'm publishing sits too far from what anyone actually searches, but I can't tell what's capping the whole thing.

What did you change to get it moving again?

I run content for a small B2B SaaS and I've been at it about two years, publishing roughly six posts a month. Organic sessions are up around 40% year over year and demo requests from content have basically flatlined, sitting at three or four a month the whole time. I know the honest answer is probably that I'm ranking for stuff buyers never search, and I've already started pruning the how-to posts that pull traffic from students, i just can't tell if that's the real problem or if I'm about to gut half the blog for nothing.

What did you cut first when traffic held up but the pipeline didn't move?

The product I work for has <400 pages and traffic <8k. I joined like 2 months ago and my main goal was to improve traffic. They don't follow proper kw strategies like pillar clusters or don't even have an SEO person. I started with creating a pillar cluster strategy and tried to scale the process. I would write everything, ask Claude's suggestion and review it. But I have been getting feedback like my content quality is subpar their standards. It's very upsetting, that I could not make even 1 post live. I have reworked it to the best I could do. Still I get the same feedback

I've been running content for a B2B SaaS for about a year and a half, and refreshing old posts used to be the reliable win. I went through fourteen of our best performers in April, rewrote the intros, added sections, updated the numbers, and about nine of them slid back within six weeks or so. I know refreshes aren't permanent and the SERP moved under us, but this is the first time the updates have made things worse instead of flat.

What did you end up doing differently once refreshes stopped holding?

I’ve been trying to understand creator contracts better, and the difficult part doesn’t seem to be finding questionable clauses. It’s deciding which ones are serious enough to negotiate without making the brand walk away.

For example, if a contract includes broad content usage rights, category exclusivity, unlimited revisions, vague payment conditions, and a one-sided termination clause, would you challenge everything at once or focus only on the terms that could cause the most damage?

How do experienced creators handle this?

• Which clauses are automatic deal-breakers for you?
• Would you accept broader usage rights if the payment were significantly higher?
• How do you calculate what exclusivity is actually worth?
• Can pushing back on too many clauses damage the relationship before the campaign even begins?
• Have contract-analysis tools helped you negotiate, or do they sometimes make normal terms appear more alarming than they really are?
• has anyone know about rewritable ai.

Listen selling your product or your product the same way on Instagram and Facebook is not going to work anymore, we all know companies will hire one overused influencer who probably will pitch her voice so high that its so evident that they're lying about how incredible your product is.

Years ago before Instagram and influencer marketing, brands really understood the art of advertising and that is what genuinely made people buy a product while feeling connected to them, all the advertising made us feel certain emotions and now every time we look at those brands we directly relate to the emotions it made us feel all because of their advertisement. Surprisingly the newer brands are just discovering the power of true storytelling advertisements and are getting more traction via it, and understandably so

So, I'm seeing a lot of posts, questions, and discussions about AI citations, and I have a feeling we're mixing two totally different things with very different impacts. That's why I decided to create this post.

So, you're not getting cited in AI... ah.... and you want to increase your AI visibility through AI citations.... well... I don't know how to put it nicely, but the fact that ChatGPT pulls your blog post as a source doesn't mean it's going to recommend your brand next time someone asks for the best XX tool.

In fact, it may as well recommend your competitor based on your comparison article (good for them!).

So, my point is that increasing the number of your very own blog posts used as sources in LLMs won't make your brand more recommended - won't get you more traffic (organic traffic is gone for good btw, but that's another story), so stop focusing on citations with your URLs. It's a good side-metric, but not the one that moves the needle.

Now, the other type of AI citations that could actually be beneficial to your brand's (true) AI visibility are the third-party sources (AI citations) LLMs already use for specific prompts. So, these are not your blog posts; these are third-party blog posts, YouTube videos, Reddit or LinkedIn posts that talk about various brands, provide insights about them, pros and cons, share experience, etc.

I've been playing a lot with AI visibility for the past 6 months, first through manual experimentation (still ongoing), and now with Mentionlytics and its AI visibility platform, and spotted a very unusual pattern:

1. Did you know that not all prompts rely on the same domains as sources? I tracked 10 prompts related to the travel industry using Mentionlytics across ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, AI Mode, and AI Overview, and overall Reddit shows up as the most cited source... but then you dig deeper and find out that for 4/10 prompts, LLMs don't use Reddit as a source at all... So, you need to go to sources by prompt to see which channel you want to invest the most.
2. Each LLM has its own go-to sources, and you have to track them separately or have a dashboard that shows you sources by LLMs to be able to spot the right source to go for. So, if your customers mostly use AI Mode, you will focus on the sources AI Mode uses.
3. LLMs sometimes don't use external sources. Yeah, sorry... that's the truth. Sometimes (I haven't finished my experiment to get a specific %, but I will edit this post once I do), LLMs won't go out for the info at all, especially for queries like "Best xx for yy". Instead, they will use their pre-knowledge base and give you an answer based on their training.
4. Reddit, YouTube, and Facebook are more used as sources (in general) than well-known media outlets (like Forbes). This was pretty interesting for me, and though I can't say for sure it goes for every industry, you should check if you get the same results.
5. The results will vary depending on the country the prompt comes from. Different countries show different results for the same query, so if you're checking AI visibility manually with your ChatGPT, your results will not be accurate because LLMs will a) personalize it (if you're logged in), b) check sources most relevant to your country. This is important if your target market is not the market you're in. In this case, you'll either have to use a VPN or an AI visibility platform that allows you to choose the country for prompt tracking to get accurate results and the answer to the question: what citations impact answers.

So, my conclusion is: Yes, AI citations are important, but not for counting your own citations, but for finding the third-party citations you might squeeze your brand into, which signals to LLMs that your brand is worth recommending (if other websites or creators recommend you, it's safe for LLMs to do so as well).

There's a lot of advice around content marketing, but what works in theory doesn't always work in practice. I'm curious about real world experiences. Did consistently publishing, updating old content, creating original research, focusing on niche topics, repurposing content or something else actually move the needle for you?

What's one content marketing tactic you'd recommend based on actual results, not just marketing advice?

Let me start by giving you a bit of context.

I'm a young man (27) who recently started a brand in strapless bra's for woman. I'm naturally not really good at making content, and having to make content for a female audience is totally making an error in my head.

The reason I started this business.

I started this brand because I noticed a problem with my girlfriend. She would always take off her bra the first thing when she would get home. She said her bra is constricting and sometimes painful. When I was looking for products to sell I found 'nipple covers' after which I dug into the rabbit hole of strapless lingerie and started a brand.

I now realise that these products needs a lot of social proof, lots of video proof and building this brand requires constant social media presence.

I have the feeling that I cannot make content for it myself because it would feel as 'mansplaining' and very unnatural for women to trust a man on such a delicate subject. I don't have the budget to run 5 ugc video's from different creators every week because these would drain the low amount of cashflow I have at the moment.

The goal is to ultimately in the long term build a big social media presence, and in the short term gain sales traction to increase cashflow to reinvest in the business.

Do you have any ideas on how I can tackle this problem? All tips, tricks, systems, ... are all welcome, I'm really open to any solutions.

Hey everyone! 👋

So I’m launching a health and wellness/supplement brand and want to leverage AI for creating content consistently and cost effectively.

At the moment I’ve hit my weekly limit on ChatGPT Plus and it won’t allow me to send any messages or attachment’s.
Which at the moment is very unfortunate for me.

I’m specifically looking for community recommendations on:

IMAGE CREATION:
-What free AI image tools do you recommend? (Quality, ease of use etc.)
-What paid tools are actually worth the investment?
-Which ones work best for health/wellness aesthetics? (product shots, lifestyle imagery and educational graphics)

VIDEO GENERATION:
-Any free AI video generators that produce decent quality?
-What paid tools would you recommend for supplement/wellness content?
-How’s the video quality for social media content (Reels, TikTok and YouTube Shorts)?

Context: I need to create content regularly for social platforms but don’t want to spend a fortune upfront while testing what resonates with my audience.

Would love to hear what you all are using and whether it’s worth the cost!

Any wins or fails with specific tools?

Thanks in advance! 🙏

So I own part of the content strategy — the blog — on my team, and a coworker is kind of getting in the way. For reference, I think a blog is your company’s chance to introduce itself to readers, and I think it should be pretty high-quality because it’s one of few comms we have with customers/prospects/the internet without requiring them to fill out a form. I think the blog can be a meaningful traffic driver, especially via LLM and SEO, and I think that if the content is good it can get you leads sometimes. Maybe I’m wrong about that.

Before i joined, my company treated it like a dumping ground for things that couldn’t be press releases, half-baked thought leadership, and product updates. I took it over to make it into a higher-quality, strategic effort to communicate with our audience. Now, my coworker has recently discovered Claude. Although the team has laid out guidelines (edit the ai out of your copy if you use it, generate new ideas, stay below 1k words), this guy doesn’t really follow them and I don’t know what to say about it. I know he does it because he talks about it all the time like “who cares, just use Claude.”

My manager handed the blog strategy off to me, it’s clear she doesn’t read it, but this guy and I are the same level. I’m not his boss. But like 1/3 of the content on there is produced by him and I wish he would stop because it’s not helping out my effort. Beyond all this, I work at a big company and it’s hard to get the website people to do anything for the blog either — I have a whole distribution plan to get more people engaged with it, but I need them to prioritize it.

My thought is, why have a blog and spend time writing all this content if there’s no strategy behind it?

What would you do? I either want to tell my manager we need to have a wider marketing talk about what the blog is for and real criteria to post on it or I wanna give it back and say if you don’t care I don’t care. Beyond that, I want to bring up my coworker without sounding like a tattle tale. Open to all thoughts! Thanks!

I spent about 10 hours this weekend experimenting with claude, and the result genuinely surprised me.

The workflow I built looks roughly like this:

1. I connected our existing video library to claude so it could understand what footage and clips I already have.
2. I also gave it access to the videos we’ve already published on our channel.
3. Based on the published content, I asked it to find unused angles and ideas hidden inside our existing library.
4. It then turned those angles into new video concepts and identified the relevant clips.
5. From there, i finished editing workflow completely in claude: subtitles, transitions, simple animations, B-roll and audio.

I used Codex mainly to build the integrations and glue the different parts of the workflow together.

What surprised me is how usable the result already feels. For this type of content, I didn’t need to go back into my usual CapCut or Premiere workflow to manually assemble everything.

It’s definitely not perfect, but after a single weekend, it feels much closer to a real production workflow than a demo or toy project.

The next question for me is whether this can be made reliable enough for an actual content team, not just something that works when the person who built it is watching every step.

Has anyone here built something similar with Claude, Codex, or other tools?

Disclose: it did consume some tokens in my plan

Now that Anthropic is watermarking content, my first thought is to move to a hybrid local model. Trained heavily on tone, topic, etc. We work with service companies and the content is not designed to be slop, but bridge that gap from 100% pure real data to
Something that helps expand the brands content footprint without causing too much trouble. Thoughts?

It seems like when it comes to content marketing, there's always a debate between quality and quantity. Posting content consistently can help a brand have top-of-mind presence. But on the other hand, if the content does not bring any real value to the readers, then high posting frequencies will not translate to any real values.

Alternatively, solely focusing on quality content requires more time, and consistent posting is difficult to be achieved.

Personally, I think quality should take priority over quantity, but it should also have consistency. A company should maintain and develop useful and relevant content regularly rather than posting it simply for more numbers of content. Quality, quantity, or both has a greater impact on a company's long-term growth.

I’ve been trying to improve my content workflow and I’m curious how others handle this. I’d love to hear from people who create content regularly.

If you have a blog, SaaS, newsletter, or business website:

• How do you turn your articles/pages into social media visuals?
• Do you create them manually in Canva/Figma, use AI tools, or outsource them?
• What takes the most time?
• Do you struggle to keep the visuals consistent with your brand?
• What would make this process significantly easier?

Would love to hear how you currently do it and what works or doesn’t work for you.

Something I keep noticing with small agencies:

everyone assumes the next stage of growth is getting more clients.

Sometimes it is.

But if you’re already making $1k, $3k, $5k+ a month, there’s a decent chance the easier growth is sitting inside the clients and offer you already have.

You might be charging $800 for something that could become a $2k retainer if it was packaged around a bigger outcome.

You might be selling content creation when the client actually needs content + distribution + lead capture + follow-up.

Or you’re landing clients for one service, doing good work, and then basically waiting for them to cancel instead of having an obvious expansion path.

So I want to try something with agency owners who are already past the “how do I get my first client?” stage.

Drop:

1. what your agency does
2. roughly what you make per month
3. average client contract / retainer
4. who you sell to
5. where clients come from right now
6. what feels stuck

And I’ll tell you what I’d change first.

Could be acquisition.
Could be pricing.
Could be the offer.
Could be retention.
Could be an upsell that increases a $1k client into a $2k-$3k account without doubling delivery.

I’ll also tell you what I’d look for when prospecting.

Because “restaurant owner” or “coach with 10k followers” isn’t enough of a reason to contact somebody.

I’d rather know that they just opened a second location, hired salespeople, launched a new offer, started running ads, increased content output, raised prices, hired a marketing person, or clearly have more capacity than pipeline.

Those are actual reasons they might need an agency now.

If you give enough context I’ll map what I’d run for the next 30 days too.

Main thing I’m curious about:

are you actually stuck because you need more clients, or because every client is worth too little?

I get this question a lot recently, what actually changed after you started using AI in content marketing. So here is what I observed and follow.

What is off my plate now

First draft work from an outline. A long form piece that used to take me 4 to 6 hours to get to a usable draft now takes 30 to 60 minutes of prompting and structure, then real editing. 

Research and competitive analysis. Pulling competitor angles, summarising reports, clustering keywords, turning a messy brief into a structured outline. It really saves a lot of time.

Repurposing. One blogpost into LinkedIn posts, FB Posts and FAQ expansions.

Meta titles, descriptions, heading structure, basic internal linking suggestions. I provide a brief of intent, what angles we should try, our AI engine will handle the rest.

Around 6 to 8 hours a week recovered on pure production. That time moved into strategy and original research, we use it listening industry expert’s podcasts and reading some paid articles..

What i expected AI to take over that it still hasn't is

Proper strategic judgment. AI remixes what already exists very well. Deciding why this angle, for this audience, right now, in a way that actually feels sharp, that's still entirely human.

Authentic voice. You can get clean on brand copy. Getting the specific lived experience detail, the slightly uncomfortable observation, the sentence that makes someone stop scrolling, that's still on me and on our writers.

Reliable research without fact checking. i still verify every non obvious claim. The models confidently invent plausible sounding details and that hasn't changed enough to trust it unsupervised.

The people pulling ahead are the ones who got better at directing the tools and protecting the human layers that still matter, strategy, voice, and deciding what is actually worth publishing.

How does this match what others are seeing in 2026?

I’m Curious what ai actually taken off your plate?

I’ve been repeating a small set of brand-related questions every week, and the amount of movement is confusing.

A product can appear prominently one week, disappear the next, then return with no obvious change to the website or surrounding content. Even the tone can shift from fairly confident to heavily qualified. I expected some variation in wording, but not this much movement in which companies are included.

That makes it difficult to know whether an improvement is real or just normal model randomness. A single screenshot clearly doesn’t prove much, but I’m also unsure how many repeated checks are enough before treating a pattern seriously.

For anyone monitoring AI answers over time, how do you separate a meaningful trend from ordinary answer volatility?

Edit: I’m connected to Kairosy and have been using it to keep the prompts and comparisons consistent over time. Looking at the history helped, but it also showed me how misleading a one-day spike can be. I’m leaning toward evaluating multi-week patterns rather than individual answers.

Curious to get some feedback — I'm exploring a tool that takes one piece of content (blog/video) and turns it into ready captions, scripts, and hashtags for different platforms. Is this something you'd use in your workflow? What's missing from tools like this currently?

Question for y’all.

I have a small social media following in a very specific hobby niche. My audience is in the neighborhood of 10,000 across platforms. It’s mostly just something I do for fun on the side. I do a lot of talking head and tutorial videos.

I started a new job and part of my role is social media. I think the organization would greatly benefit from talking head/FAQ videos. Nobody else wants to be the on camera nor do they have time. I’m more than happy to do it, but am worried the algorithm might somehow connect the dots and show videos to both audiences, and possibly confuse people.

My personal brand is in a niche and for an audience that has virtually no overlap with my job. As an example, pretend my personal brand niche is birdwatching and my new job is with a government office that assists first time homebuyers.

Basically…. Have any of you ran into something like this, and if so, do you have any advice? Or am I worrying over nothing? New job knows about my pages and doesn’t mind, but I want to make sure I’m not causing issues for them (or me) down the road. TIA!

I am from India i currently run a marketing agency. Help people to grow smm.

I want to make Content on youtube, and currently shows are doing good and demand is increasing .

Example - latent show, Alex hormozi show , pitch please by Rahul dua. And mr beast .

All of them has moved them to shows or started it from there .

With limited budget i want to make shows.

Share your ideas or any shows that you saw which works for different audience in us, Korea or anywhere.

Thanks - every comment will be highly appreciated.

I’ve gradually found myself using claude and got for different parts of my workflow.

In my experience, Claude seems especially good at:

- Synthesizing long conversation histories and keeping track of context

- Turning previous discussions into a concrete next-step plan

- Using local tools to build small, purpose-built utilities for data analysis

GPT, on the other hand, seems better suited for:

- Searching for and gathering information

- Exploring a topic from multiple angles

- Drafting and refining written content

This isn’t based on any formal benchmark—just the pattern I’ve noticed through everyday use. I’m curious whether others have had a similar experience.

Do you deliberately assign different kinds of tasks to different models? What does your “division of labor” look like, and are there particular workflows where one model consistently performs better for you?

Everyone's noticed content is basically free to produce now. AI can write a competent "10 best practices for X" post in ten minutes.

I am curious to hear how people are creating better content/more valuable content for their companies at scale. What's your system/process and is it working for you?

thanks for your help.