Quality over quantity

Both clients and agencies use various AI tools for generating ideas, gathering information, summarising research, writing articles and advertisements, and translating content. Large companies are using AI to accelerate marketing processes and increase the production of all kinds of content, while significantly reducing costs. AI agents, in particular, have proven highly effective for repetitive tasks, as they can independently carry out assignments in line with predefined goals.

What does this mean for copywriters? Artificial intelligence tools have made content production significantly easier. What once required hours of research and thought can now be completed in minutes. All it takes is an effective prompt, and the text begins to take shape before our eyes within moments. Linguistically, it is more or less correct, structured according to our instructions, and written in the style we specified. At first glance, it is difficult to find fault with it. And yet, something is missing. Something that attentive readers quickly notice.

What it lacks is critical reflection, a clear point of view — the very thing that makes content distinctive.

After all, it merely takes fragments of existing content and rearranges them into a new form.

AI saves us a tremendous amount of time

Today, when we begin creating content, we can ask an AI model to suggest a direction, find and summarise sources, define the structure, and prepare a draft. In doing so, it saves us a great deal of time.

The question, however, is what we do with that extra time.

Do we use it to verify sources and facts, refine the style, and add a personal point of view? Or do we use it to produce even more instant content?

AI’s remarkable ability to process vast amounts of information at high speed can easily tempt us into believing that we can create more, faster, and at a lower cost. But this is precisely where the trap lies: does more really mean better?

AI often makes mistakes

Blind trust in AI-generated answers is simply not enough. Articles published on popular online news portals, where speed is often prioritised above all else, frequently demonstrate this problem — inaccurate information that most readers may overlook, but not everyone will. As a result, the source gradually loses credibility.

It seems that the role of the writer is increasingly evolving into that of an editor. AI produces the content, while the writer evaluates whether it is worthy of attention, whether it is relevant, and whether it offers added value. It is precisely the combination of the speed and efficiency provided by artificial intelligence and the judgement of an experienced writer or editor — someone who knows, understands, and respects their own or the client’s audience — that can result in content which is both credible and competitive.

AI should remain an assistant, not a substitute for human creativity.

Let it handle the search and processing of information, while we use the time gained for creative thinking and strategic decision-making.

The fear that artificial intelligence will write instead of us is far less dangerous than the possibility that we might abandon our role as editors. As history has shown many times before, the real threat is not the new technology itself, but the way we choose to use it. The fact is that AI-generated content will soon flood every channel, and readers will find it increasingly difficult to recognise it. What they will still recognise, however, is high-quality, informative content, as well as genuine stories and authentic experiences.

Quality over quantity must remain the foundation of editorial work.

After all, would you actually read what you delivered to your client?