Article Content vs. Real Life – Original Content

Sometimes the fastest and easiest way just isn’t the best way.

We’ve all received email spam written by a machine. It’s easy to spot because it’s often 100% grammatically correct English, yet the content itself is confusing, convoluted or just plain meaningless. In essence, it’s well-structured gibberish.

Believe it or not, email is not the only online medium victimized by software-derived content. Every day we receive article submissions that look like genuine articles, but read like a trip into the Twilight Zone … often to the point of being downright absurd.

In the 3rd episode of our “Article Content vs. Real Life” video series, we move some of that software-derived content into the real world. It quickly becomes obvious just how wrong, and funny, the result can be!

Downloadable Versions:
WMV Format     MOV Format     MV4 Format     MP3 Format

As humorous as the result may be, the act of publishing software-derived content is just plain wrong and incredibly unethical. Users expect to find high-quality, original content when they’re searching for informational articles, not meaningless garbage designed to fool the search engines.

With that thought in mind, here are 7 reasons for providing only fresh, original human-derived content:

  1. It’s all written in your voice.
  2. The CTR of original content is considerably higher.
  3. It represents your brand.
  4. Your article fulfills the reader’s need.
  5. The content builds your credibility.
  6. It builds an audience for your materials.
  7. The conversion rate is significantly higher.

If you’re currently using any type of software to generate your article content, stop now. You’re not only short-changing your audience, you’re also short-changing yourself.

Leave a comment to share your encounters with software-derived content.


Lance Winslow writes:

I agree 100%.

Besides, if anyone wants to know how to write articles faster and produce more content without cheating, I’ve always offered my assistance at no charge. New article authors should find mentors if they are having challenges, not try to cheat the system.

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 12:45 PM


LOUIS BAUM writes:

Hi Lance;

Kindly look at our web page and see what can be done
to get it on the market. B2B as well as wholesale distributors, Massmarketers & direct sales to end users.

You opinion is very much appreciated

Louis Baum


Jon Bone writes:

Yes I thought the whole idea was to be orignal and not to cheat?

Jon Bone


Marte writes:

I’ve quit being frustrated and upset when my Google alerts turn up one of my articles that has been through this software. I just wish they’d take my name off before they use it!

Some of it is quite humorous. Real estate is almost always referred to as “actual estate.” The word “can” turns into “crapper.” But the one I can’t figure out is how they get “bag” for “house,” and that shows up often.

For instance, in my resource box for some articles about home building I refer to my husband, a retired home builder. They always refer to him as an “old bag builder.”

That’s kind of fun… How many gals get to call their husbands an “old bag?”

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 12:46 PM


Jeff M. Stevens writes:

I could not agree more. No matter how much technology we use, marketing and sales is still HUMAN to HUMAN, no matter the mode of transfer. Providing stuff written by a machine is always destined to have a short shelf life.

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 3:08 PM


Sonny Dinger writes:

Hi There,
Well, because of listening to Speakers/ Preachers and being
one myself, our joke was that they lost their ” train of thought”,
and were chasing Rabbits, or did not study their Speech,
Sermon or lost their notes, so they created/made-up thoughts
as they continued to speak / or, in this case ,write, and
not sticking to the subject at hand, so long as they had a vioce,
and would “fit-in” , thank you for listening, I enjoy the Letters
and wil write some Articles soon,

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 3:35 PM


Gerry writes:

Blame it on PLR and spinning software, newcomers in article marketing are made to believe that more and faster is better, but I’ve seen enough of these useless PLR articles and the spun versions these spinners spit out so I totally agree… it’s best to write your articles from scratch.

If you are going to use a PLR article, use only the title to get a topic idea but dump the body text. Usually it’s useless.

No machine can ever replace human creativity and logic.

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 3:39 PM


Katrina writes:

I full agree! We’ve started our site up recently and it is really gaining a lot of readership, however, we’ve noticed that our originally written articles (sometimes taking hours lol) are showing up elsewhere. We’ve also noticed people out there attempting to post up gibberish nonsence in the comment sections of our articles just for a link to their site, and they come back over and over using the same phrase sometimes as well. We’ve talked about it and can only assume that ‘they’ have been generating these comments using a program/software that just spits out gibberish (sometimes semi-meaningful).

I guess we should follow your lead Marte and not bother to care about it and let it upset us, it is what it is I suppose.

Good article, what can be done to stop this though I wonder.


Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 3:42 PM



I have always been reluctant to try any spinning software and yet I am amazed at how many of my peers do use it! It really is not that difficult to write a few hundred words on any given topic.

I suppose that is the difference between a writer and just some guy who wants to get his name out there as much as possible.


Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 3:42 PM


MarVeena writes:

I have never heard of spinning software.
Thanks for the heads up! I do write all my own stuff for the good, the bad and the ugly.

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 3:54 PM


Susan meindl writes:

I write articles to attract clients to my psychology practice. In effect what I am selling in my articles is “my voice”. Clients have to recognize something in the human tone and attitude that tells them that I will be someone they feel comfortable with.
I cannot imagine why anyone would bother to have a machine write an article. Computers are not THAT good yet!!

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 4:36 PM


Mike Morgan writes:

I have to agree.
Some of the material floating around the Internet is just hilarious!
Why would anyone want to visit the site of somebody who offers nonsensical material.
It is like the early days of online translations.
They were really funny.

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 4:47 PM


Elisabeth Kuhn writes:

As a linguist, I’m actually quite amused by the results of some clearly spun material that regularly appears as comments on my blog, and that I obviously do not approve.

As far as using spun content as articles goes… it seems so counterproductive to be almost absurd. After all, my articles with my byline represent ME and I want them to make me look good ;-)

I would guess that most people who use spun articles are using them with pen names or anonymously.

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 4:49 PM


Marc writes:

Enjoyable video. Certain types of poetry may be amenable to word and phrase spinning in much the same way that random splashes of color can produce some interesting abstract art. So if there are any poetry directories out there, that’s where you could submit spun content and actually add value.

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 5:35 PM


That’s an interesting thought, Marc. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. Although I find spun articles deplorable, the thought of computer-generated poetry is fascinating since I personally have done work in computer generated art. It’s basically the same thing.



Bravo! Who would want to be associated or affiliated with anyone who endorses, sells, or promotes electronically generated text? I do not. You do not. No surprise, but definitely reassuring. Thank you.

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 5:41 PM


Dave writes:

I agree with Marte’s comments above. Watching your article show up on other blogs badly rewritten used to really get to me and now I try to laugh. Fortunately, they rarely include my name. They are basically stolen for the outline content and random words are rewritten with non-applicable synonyms.

When I started my site I needed additional content so I accepted submissions from an article distribution service.

In the end, I rewrote each submitted article by hand (because they were so bad) giving the original author credit they really didn’t completely deserve.

Now, I just write all articles myself as it is actually faster than correcting the ones that are submitted.

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 6:38 PM



I agree with most of the readers here. Auto-generated content is spam. Period. I can’t believe that other business people/entrepreneurs would actually use this stuff. There is no shortcut for success. No one “trick” to drive tons of traffic to your site.

Just reiterating what’s already been said, but…

You can’t be successful if you don’t pay your dues.

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 6:55 PM


Yuan.Yu writes:

I agree too, the reason of write article is useful first.

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 8:32 PM



I agree with your views on this topic. Still some of the bloggers rely upon the machine writing,which is 100% useless and make the reader so boredom.

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 9:26 PM


Mark writes:

yes, there is lot of importance of fresh and real contents to grasp the attentions of reader. Agreed with topic.

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 9:59 PM


Arun Prabhu writes:

Software generated articles …ha…ha…what shall we see next? Well Marc, you do have a noble intention of seeking original articles. But then, the Brave New World may just be round the corner, much earlier than what Aldous Huxley anticipated!!

Comment provided July 2, 2010 at 11:05 PM


Simon Drake writes:

It is only a matter of time before some bright spark lets a content spinner sift through content on the internet, presses a button and lets it spit out an entire novel, and it gets published, wins accolades, is made into a film, the nonsensical characters are turned into figurines for children, and makes real writers look like un-imaginative backward hack/hicks. A bit like Harry Potter, hmm

Comment provided July 3, 2010 at 1:31 AM


Tracy Z. Rewey writes:

Great video series! Good for making us laugh and making a valid point.

I have to second Marte. My field is real estate notes and the “spin” on industry terms can be both hilarious and frustrating.

I’m a slow writer but once finished know the results are original and meaningful article for readers. Guess there’s no short cut for real life!

Comment provided July 3, 2010 at 6:25 AM


Ray Terris writes:

It gets worse, I recently watched a video where the 2 guys were selling software that produced a book that would get published by amazon. They demonstrated that it could be done in about 7 minutes.

Comment provided July 3, 2010 at 7:10 AM


Chris writes:

On a related subject, I recently did a seminar with a very, VERY large personal growth site owner. He was selling his article writing expertise at $100 a month.

He seemed to advocate taking public domain articles, changing a couple of words or so, and then publishing it under your own name. Apparently, he even provides such articles.

I was appalled. Even this site owner seems to want volumes of articles, no matter how poor the quality or how unoriginal. I just don’t understand the motivation for such a stance… Is there one?

Weird. This is just a waste of time for anyone reading such an article. So it wastes (steals) our valuable resources just as spam does. And since borrowed truth is not your truth, it’s also specious.

I view this as totally unethical…

Comment provided July 3, 2010 at 7:47 AM


Brook writes:

Great video! I always found that articles are like panda bears which wear astronaut suits in the summer. It is as if the reason for the eco system going down has an exact comparison to easter bunny suits being produced in China.


Comment provided July 3, 2010 at 8:31 AM


christian writes:

I am always worried about somebody copying my articles. Duplicate content might hurt your websites rankings.

Comment provided July 3, 2010 at 10:31 AM


Oh, it isn’t DUPLICATE material. I suspect they run it through translation software because of the odd word substitutions that are consistent. I wrote that ‘She does surgery on eggs.’ and the spun article said ‘She is a surgery on eggs.’


Andrea Allen writes:

I believe this to be a very funny take on bots doing human homework. I write all of my own article content.

Comment provided July 3, 2010 at 2:52 PM


Lynn Serafinn writes:

Eegad! I thought online translators were a scream, but article spinners? Like a few of the others, I had no idea they existed. I’d like to know how Marte gets the Google alerts for her butchered articles. I blog so much all over the internet, I wouldn’t be surprised if my name showed up in some pretty funny locations.

As an author, the LAST thing I would ever want to do is use a piece of software to write my articles for me! It’s challenging enough for me to be able to “let go” and let other people write promo copy for me, so I’d hardly let a computer decide how to present my thoughts to the world.

Love the video, btw. And I also loved Marte’s examples! Just too funny. I will share this on Twitter. ;-)

Comment provided July 3, 2010 at 4:29 PM


Glad you like the video – we were pleased with the way it turned out and the message it conveyed in a humorous manner. We’d love to see it go viral, so any help you can give it is greatly appreciated! :-)


sreekumar writes:

spell check, grammar check from computers, calculations through calculators, so far so good, but to generate thoughts through machine, it is impossible.

Comment provided July 3, 2010 at 7:32 PM



I have seen too many of those article writing software emails to count. I write many articles about family safety and no machine will ever replace common sense.

Comment provided July 3, 2010 at 10:09 PM


Bill Bret writes:

I’ve read the comments with interest and it seems that there seems to be some very clear black/white distinctions being made about “article spinning”.

What constitutes article spinning?

If you write an article about a subject that you have little knowledge or experience, where do you start? Let’s take the subject of “puppy training” for example.

Would you start by punching “puppy training” into Google? Or perhaps, you have some PLR articles or maybe even some printed books or magazines?

Whatever the approach, the chances are that you will use words and phrases from these sources and re-constitute (or paraphrase) them for you own article.

Isn’t “paraphrasing” just another form of “spinning”? If so, then are we not all “spinning” articles already?

Sure, automated spinning produces unintelligible garbage. However, well “spun” articles can be as good as any “original” (paraphrased?) content.

Isn’t “spinning” = “paraphrasing” but just in a semi- automated way?

Done badly (e.g. articles written by non-English speaking, offshore article writing agencies), “paraphrasing” can produce as much rubbish as automated spinning software.

I can point to many articles in EzineArticles that, grammatically, read as gibberish. Some are obviously “spun” but I suspect that as many, if not perhaps more, are written offshore.

Ultimately, this is all about quality of information. Is “spinning” any less of a valid approach to creating content than “off shoring” or “paraphrasing”?

Unless you are the only person who knows about a particular subject, then the chances are that you are already guilty of the “crime” of “spinning”.

Just some ideas to promote further discussion before we all blindly jump on the “let’s demonize spinning” bandwagon;)

Comment provided July 4, 2010 at 4:23 AM


Some of the articles on EzineArticles are so lame and oddly phrased, have so little content, just banal stuff that anybody knows when the articles claims to impart some special knowledge, that I agree with you: Spun articles get through. I signed up for articles on farm and ranching, and for a year now get many articles purporting to be about building chicken coops. These articles could be written by a first grader.



I’ve seen an example of this. A website picked up one of my articles and rewrote it using software, he did include my link but I am embarrassed to think that some people will think that I wrote that article. The conversation in the video seems as though it makes perfect sense by comparison.

Comment provided July 4, 2010 at 4:09 PM


Marte writes:

Phillip – That’s exactly how I felt the first few times I saw “spun” articles with my name on them. But then I realized that most people can recognize what’s going on.

If your article was the only one on their blogs that looked stupid, then they might think it was your writing. But when every one of them is gibberish, they know the stupidity lies with the blog owner – not the people who wrote the articles he or she is spinning.

Comment provided July 5, 2010 at 2:21 AM


Thank you Marte, You made me feel a little better about it. I guess it’s one of those thing we need to just grin and bear it. Sorry to hear that your actual estate is in the crapper and my sympathies to your old bag of a husband. Thanks also for pointing out the humor of the situation.


Amy writes:

I completely agree with this. A rather lazy student I know tried to use a machine to write one of his essays. It was partly because of this that he failed the course. The quality of writing from human being is usually so much better than computer-generated writing (at least for now), it’s just pointless to ‘cheat’.

Comment provided July 5, 2010 at 10:07 AM


Joseph J Gomez writes:

I’ve actually seen articles of mine lifted and put through some sort of article spinner and had the result looking like some sort of kid wrote it using his limited, broken english. The article spinners work in a sense in that I’ve seen them get pretty high search results, but the article itself is gobbledygook. Good to see I’m not the only one this has happened to.

Comment provided July 5, 2010 at 11:26 AM


Bryan Alvarez writes:

Thank you guys, well just hope Google will find a way to counter all these spinner softwares. There were a lot of them now in the web and can be used instantly to produce another version of your blog in a whim.

Comment provided July 5, 2010 at 1:00 PM


Marte writes:

Lynn – Google alerts doesn’t give you everything to be found under your name, but it gives you a lot. It’s supposed to give you whatever is new.

It’s nice when you see that someone real has picked up your article and published it the way you wrote it, or when someone else mentioned you in their blog.

Just go to and set it up to alert you about your name, someone else’s name, or the topic of your choice. You’ll see how when you get there.

Have fun!

Comment provided July 5, 2010 at 11:55 PM


chris writes:

I tried using article spinners but everything sounds like it has been translated through 5 languages and sounds like total gibberish

Comment provided July 15, 2010 at 3:33 PM


Robert Kintigh writes:

It always comes down to the same thing and that is there is no way to cheat hard work. Let’s not get into cliches about working smarter and all that. at the end of the day driving traffic is like anything else, no for the weak at heart. You must work harder than the guy or gal next to you to get traffic to your sites and great content still rules. Cheating will never prevail long term. We do not have the traffic we want yet so we keep on working. Please check out our site as we would love any tips you can offer. Great job and the comments where also great.

Comment provided July 18, 2010 at 12:36 PM


Al Sefati writes:

I have always encouraged to write real content not only for SEO purposes but also user purposes. Good content could lead in links which not only it will improve SEO but it will also will increase consumer and visitor trust and conversion.

Comment provided August 11, 2010 at 4:13 PM


Belinda Meyer writes:

Philip M. Parker has “written” over 200,000 books (compilations) all computer generated!

Comment provided August 11, 2010 at 6:22 PM


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

Please read our comment policy before commenting.