4 years as a content writer working with AI | IbexAI Blog
Get Started
← About IbexAI
4 years as a content writer working with AI
Stephanie<br>June 2026 · 2,604 words
My profession is one of the main targets of the AI job doom. I've been working as a professional content writer for 4 years now, even longer if you consider the fact that all I ever did in college was write essays and thesis papers.
When Generative AI first arrived in 2020, everyone was talking about how it could make "good content" in orders of magnitude less time and money than what you'd have spent hiring a writer like me.
And yet, I'm still here. Like a cockroach that won't die, no matter what kind of bug spray humans come up with.
I don't attribute my survival in this complicated job market solely to my merits. I believe I'm a good writer, but being "good" isn't enough these days. I had the advantage of getting an early start on creating AI content. When OpenAI first introduced its breakthrough model GPT 3.5, I was lucky enough to be working in an SEO agency with a founder who prioritized learning about AI, and how it could be used in the marketing space.
Ever since then, I've had continuous exposure to how AI is used in content marketing. I've had a lot of clients, ranging from people who are extremely against AI to others who would give me access to their model and tell me to just generate everything with AI and focus on polishing it. It's this exposure to the development of AI in the content marketing space that led me to the opinions I'm sharing with you today.
I have a lot of reasons why I think AI won't (and can't) replace human workers. I've condensed them into 3 points, all based on my experience as a writer.
1. Good Prompting Is NOT Good Enough
I've heard one of my past clients say these exact words: "All you need is good prompting." Which I, in my humblest, most biased opinion, nope, it doesn't.
Unless you're the type of person to settle for just "good enough", then sure, go ahead. But your customers aren't stupid enough to fall for "good enough" content.
I also find it amusing how most of the people who say this are not writers themselves. There is more to making content than just explaining stuff to the reader, you know. If good prompting is all it takes, then why do marketing companies still hire writers? Simple, because even they know that good prompting is not good enough. The people yearn for more authenticity, something only human writers can give.
We are experiencing what is called AI fatigue. People are tired of seeing AI-generated content. Your readers can tell when you're just stating what everyone else has already said, and they stop reading.
The only instances I see where AI can make high-quality content are when it is used by competent writers or experts who have enough time to properly review and refine the content. They cover where the AI fails.
I remember working as a ghostwriter for a client who had this mindset that AI can do everything. He was an SEO specialist, and he needed some content done for a fashion company he'd contracted with. He told me to use AI and deliver the content immediately. I followed what he said and did everything I could to improve the content within the time I had. I submitted it to my client, and he approved it.
He came back to me a few days later with feedback from the fashion company. They said the content "lost" their brand voice. It was too AI-sounding. They weren't satisfied. I asked my client if we should rework it.
I genuinely felt bad. But my client insisted it was okay. We didn't have to make any adjustments or revisions. "They got what they paid for," he said. I'm not really sure where to place the blame there. Is it me, the writer who technically made the content? Some of my colleagues said it was understandable with the timeline given to me, but I still felt bad. Was it the fashion company? Based on what my client said, it seems they paid a low rate. Still, I have only his words. Is it my client who insisted that the timeline was feasible because of AI? He was pretty open about his amazement at AI, and there were times when I felt he trivialized my work as a content writer, but if he was working with a lower-than-usual budget, then I understand.
This is also where I realized what my main issue with the "good prompting is all it takes" mindset is. It minimizes the skill, time, and attention to detail needed to write great content that resonates with readers. There's also this insistence that if the quality of the content is bad or lacking in some way, all we have to do is "fix the prompt".
Why do people listen to podcasts? You can make AI generate a podcast script, but it lacks soul. AI-generated videos have also failed in capturing an audience. Why?
There are certain ways you can make content engaging. One is writing like you're talking to someone, like a friend. You have your own quirks, your own ways of expressing stuff. And this is what piques human...