Over the last few posts, I have been thinking a lot about non-commodity content.
By that, I mean content that is not just a repeat of what anyone could ask AI to produce.
A basic AI article can explain a topic. It can list the steps. It can summarise the pros and cons. It can produce a decent outline, a decent introduction and a decent conclusion.
But that is also the problem.
If anyone can produce something similar in a few seconds, then the content is in danger of becoming a commodity.
So the question becomes:
How do we make our content more useful, more original and more human, especially in a world where AI-generated answers and AI summaries are everywhere?
I think one of the strongest answers is this:
We need to get our own real experience and real thinking into the content.
Not forced personal stories.
Not random anecdotes.
Not “I did this once” added for the sake of it.
But genuine examples, observations, lessons learned, mistakes made, decisions taken and practical insights that could help another person.
That is probably one of the best tools we have as humans.
AI Can Write, But Humans Can Add the Useful Reality
There is a big difference between a generic explanation and a useful explanation based on real experience.
A generic article might say:
“Apply to the affiliate program, wait for approval, then add your links.”
That may be technically correct.
But someone who has actually gone through the process might be able to say:
“I applied too early and was refused because my site did not yet have enough connected content. After exchanging emails, I learned that they expected around 20 articles covering related topics before the site looked developed enough. Later, I also found that there were specific rules about what images I could use and what wording I could include in campaigns.”
That second version is much more useful.
It gives the reader something they would not necessarily get from a generic AI answer.
It helps them avoid a mistake.
It gives them a more realistic expectation.
It shows what actually happened, not just what is supposed to happen.
That is the kind of information that can turn ordinary content into helpful content.
The Cake Mix Problem
I have used this metaphor before, but I think it fits perfectly here.
A common way of using AI for content is:
- Ask AI for an outline.
- Ask AI to write the article.
- Add a bit of your own voice afterwards.
- Publish.
That can work, but there is a possible problem.
If AI creates the whole cake, and we only add our thoughts afterwards, then our contribution is a bit like icing on top.
It may improve the article.
It may make it sound more like us.
But the main cake is still mostly AI.
A better approach, in my opinion, is to get our own ideas, examples and experiences into the process much earlier.
Instead of asking AI to write the post straight away, we can have a conversation first.
We can explore the topic.
We can challenge the idea.
We can bring in things we have seen, tried, noticed, struggled with or learned.
Then, when AI helps us structure and write the article, our thinking is already in the cake mix.
The final polish is still important, but the human contribution is not just decoration.
It is part of the substance of the article.
Use AI as an Interviewer Before You Use It as a Writer
This is where I think there is a really useful human and AI collaboration.
Before asking AI to write an article, we can ask it to interview us.
For example, instead of saying:
“Write me an article about this topic.”
We could say:
“Before writing this article, ask me questions that will help uncover my personal experience, examples, observations, mistakes, decisions and lessons learned, so the article is more useful and less generic.”
That changes the role of AI.
AI is no longer just a writing machine.
It becomes an interviewer.
It helps us find the useful human material that might otherwise stay hidden in our own head.
That is important because we do not always immediately recognise which parts of our own experience are useful.
Something that feels ordinary to us may be exactly the detail another person needs.
For example:
- the thing that confused us at the start,
- the mistake we nearly made,
- the email we had to send,
- the setting we had to change,
- the product feature we misunderstood,
- the rule we only discovered later,
- the small shortcut that saved us time,
- the warning we wish we had known earlier.
Those details can be valuable.
And AI can help draw them out.
A Simple Prompt for Creating More Human Content
Here is a practical prompt someone could use before writing almost any article:
I want to write an article on this topic:
[insert topic here]
My goal is to make the article genuinely useful and less generic. Before writing the article, please interview me. Ask me specific questions that will help uncover my real experience, examples, mistakes, observations, opinions, decisions, results, lessons learned and practical tips.
I want the final article to include useful human insight, not just general information.
That prompt does not require the writer to be an expert.
It simply asks AI to help uncover what the writer already knows, has experienced or has thought about.
That could work for many types of content.
A gardener could talk about what actually worked in a small patio garden.
A beginner telescope buyer could explain which terms confused them when choosing a first telescope.
A blogger could describe what happened when they applied to an affiliate program.
A craft seller could explain what they learned at their first craft fair.
A website owner could describe what they discovered when trying to understand cookies, analytics or Pinterest traffic.
None of those examples require a huge research project.
They simply require real thought and real experience.
Personal Experience Does Not Have to Be Dramatic
One mistake people may make is thinking that “personal experience” has to mean something big.
It does not.
You do not need to have spent ten years studying a topic.
You do not need to be the world’s leading expert.
You do not need a dramatic success story.
Sometimes the most helpful content comes from small pieces of practical experience.
For example:
“I tried this and found the instructions were not as clear as they sounded.”
“I expected this step to be easy, but this was the part that slowed me down.”
“I thought the answer was going to be one thing, but after testing it, I realised the real problem was something else.”
“I searched for this myself and noticed that the AI answer covered the basics, but missed the practical decision someone actually has to make.”
That is useful.
That is human.
That is often exactly what a reader needs.
The Goal Is Not to Add Experience for the Sake of It
There is an important distinction here.
The point is not to sprinkle personal comments into an article just so we can say it includes experience.
The experience has to help the reader.
A weak version would be:
“I once applied to an affiliate program.”
A stronger version would be:
“I applied to an affiliate program before my site had enough related content and was refused. That taught me that it may be better to build a small cluster of helpful articles first, so the affiliate manager can clearly see what the site is about.”
The second version gives the reader a lesson.
That is the difference.
Personal experience becomes valuable when it helps someone else understand, decide, avoid a mistake or make progress.
AI Still Has a Very Useful Role
None of this means AI should not be used.
In fact, I think AI becomes more useful when we use it this way.
AI can help us:
- organise our thoughts,
- ask better questions,
- turn rough examples into clear explanations,
- structure the article,
- identify gaps,
- suggest headings,
- make the writing easier to follow.
But the important point is that the human input comes before the article is written, not only afterwards.
The conversation matters.
The thinking matters.
The examples matter.
That is where the non-commodity content begins.
A Better Content Workflow
A stronger workflow might look like this:
- Start with a topic or basic AI Overview.
- Ask AI what the generic version of the article would probably say.
- Ask AI what personal experience or original examples would make the article more useful.
- Let AI interview you.
- Answer with your own experiences, thoughts, examples and observations.
- Ask AI to create an article using both the general information and your human input.
- Edit the final article so it still sounds like you and says what you really mean.
That is very different from simply asking AI to produce a complete article from a blank prompt.
It is more like a collaboration.
AI helps with structure and expression.
The human provides judgement, context and lived reality.
Why This Matters More Now
This matters because online content is changing.
AI can now produce basic explanations very quickly.
Search results are increasingly filled with summaries, snippets and AI-style answers.
So if we are writing online, we need to think carefully about what we can add that is genuinely useful.
In my view, one of the best answers is:
real experience plus real thought.
That is what AI cannot simply invent on our behalf.
It can help us express it.
It can help us organise it.
It can help us turn it into a readable article.
But it needs us to bring the substance.
Final Thought
I think this is one of the most useful ways to work with AI as a content creator.
Do not just use AI as the writer.
Use it as the interviewer first.
Let it ask you what you have seen, tried, learned, misunderstood, noticed or discovered.
Then let it help you turn that into something clear and helpful.
That way, the final article is not just AI content with a little human icing on top.
Your experience is already baked into the cake.
And in an AI-dominated search world, that real human experience may be one of the most valuable ingredients we have.