I Bought 100 AI Articles for $500. They All Failed. (Here is the Traffic Graph)
⚡ Key Takeaways:
The Experiment: I tested "Programmatic SEO" (Mass AI Content) to see if volume beats quality.
The Result: 98 of the 100 articles were de-indexed by Google within 14 days.
The Lesson: The "Spam Update" is real. 100 bad articles will hurt your domain authority more than 1 good article will help it.
In Post #4, I taught you the "Intern Test"—the strict structure required to rank in 2026.
But a small, lazy part of my brain whispered:
“What if I just used AI to spam the internet? What if quantity IS quality?”
You see these ads everywhere: "Generate 1,000 articles in 1 click!" "Dominate your niche overnight!"
So, in the name of the Infomly Lab, I pulled out my credit card.
I paid a "Programmatic SEO" service $500 to generate 100 articles about "AI Software Tools."
I published them all on a test subdomain on Monday.
By Friday, I realized I had set money on fire.
The Setup: The "Content Slop" Machine
The promise was simple. The tool scraped "People Also Ask" questions and used GPT-3.5 to vomit out 1,500 words for each one.
On the surface, they looked okay.
They had headers.
They had intro paragraphs.
They had keywords.
I hit "Publish All." My site went from 50 pages to 150 pages overnight.
I sat back and waited for the traffic.
The Crash: What Google Actually Did
For the first 48 hours, I saw a spike. Google’s "Crawl Budget" rushed in to index the new pages.
I thought, "It’s working."
Then, the "Helpful Content System" (HCS) woke up.
Day 7 Stats:
Indexed: 100/100.
Traffic: 12 visits.
Day 14 Stats:
Indexed: 2/100.
Traffic: 0 visits.
Manual Action Warning: None (yet), but my main pages started ranking lower.
The "Crawl Waste" Penalty:
Google didn't just ignore the bad articles. Because I flooded my site with garbage, Google stopped crawling my good articles (the ones using the Solar System Strategy).
I had diluted my own "Entity Authority."
Why Mass AI Content Fails (The "Information Gain" Score)
Google has a patent for something called "Information Gain."
It asks: "Does this new article add anything NEW to the internet?"
My 100 Articles: They were just rewriting existing Wikipedia articles. Information Gain = 0.
My "Gemini vs ChatGPT" Review (Post #3): It had original testing data. Information Gain = High.
Google's AI is smart enough to detect "rephrased" content. If you bring nothing new to the table, you don't get a seat.
The "Solo Capitalist" Alternative
Instead of spending $500 on 100 bad articles, what should I have done?
According to my "Zero-Search Volume" Strategy (Post #9), I should have written ONE article targeting a specific buyer.
The Math of Quality vs. Quantity:
The Spam Method: 100 Articles x 0 Visitors = 0 Buyers.
The Lab Method: 1 Article x 50 Visitors (High Intent) = 2 Buyers.
Two buyers for a
20affiliatetoolearnsme∗∗20affiliatetoolearnsme∗∗40/month (recurring).**
Over a year, that one good article is worth
480.∗∗The100spamarticlesareworth∗∗−480.∗∗The100spamarticlesareworth∗∗−500.
Final Verdict: Don't Be Greedy
It is tempting to use AI to cheat.
But the Solar System (Google) is watching.
If you flood the zone with "Slop," you will be treated like a spammer.
If you treat your content like a Lab Experiment, you will be treated like a scientist.
I lost $500 so you don't have to.
Stick to the Protocol.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Is all AI content bad?
No. AI Assisted content (Human Strategy + AI Formatting) is great. AI Generated content (1-Click Bulk Publishing) is dangerous. The difference is Human Oversight.
Can I delete the bad articles?
Yes. If you made this mistake, "Pruning" (deleting) low-quality content is one of the fastest ways to recover your traffic. I deleted all 100 posts, and my rankings recovered within 2 weeks.
Does Google penalize AI content?
They penalize Low Value content. If an AI writes a profound, new insight, it ranks. If a Human writes a boring, generic listicle, it fails. It’s about value, not the author.