How to Spot AI-Generated Content (And Why It Matters)

In 2026, we're swimming in AI-generated content. Blog posts, social media updates, news articles, product reviews—much of it was written (or at least drafted) by AI.

This isn't necessarily bad. But it changes how we need to consume information.

Here's how to spot AI-generated content and think critically about what you read.

Why Should You Care?

The Trust Problem

AI can generate plausible-sounding content on any topic. But it:

• Can "hallucinate" false facts with confidence
• Often lacks original insights or expertise
• May reflect biases from training data
• Doesn't have accountability

When you don't know who (or what) created something, you can't evaluate its credibility.

The Quality Problem

AI-generated content optimized for SEO is flooding the internet. Much of it is:

• Correct but obvious
• Long-winded without substance
• Designed to rank, not inform

Finding genuine expertise is getting harder.

The Manipulation Problem

AI makes it cheap to create:

• Fake reviews
• Astroturfed opinions
• Propaganda at scale
• Phishing content

Being able to spot AI content is a basic digital literacy skill now.

Signs of AI-Generated Text

No single sign is definitive, but patterns emerge:

1. Perfect Grammar, Limp Voice

AI rarely makes grammar mistakes. But it also rarely has personality.

AI-sounding: "There are numerous factors that one must consider when evaluating the merits of various approaches to this complex issue."

Human-sounding: "Look, there's no easy answer here. I've tried both approaches and each one bites you in different ways."

AI is correct. Humans are interesting.

2. Overuse of Certain Phrases

AI has favorite constructions:

• "In today's world..."
• "It's important to note that..."
• "Dive in" / "Let's dive in"
• "In conclusion..."
• "Firstly... Secondly... Thirdly..."
• "Whether you're a beginner or an expert..."
• "In this article, we'll explore..."

These aren't proof of AI, but they're red flags.

3. Comprehensive but Unsurprising

AI excels at covering all the obvious points. It struggles with:

• Original insights
• Controversial takes
• Personal experiences
• Unexpected connections

If an article feels like it could have been assembled from existing sources without adding anything new—it probably was.

4. Suspiciously Perfect Structure

AI loves:

• Exactly three or five bullet points
• Perfectly parallel headings
• Every paragraph the same length
• Logical flow that feels almost too tidy

Real writing is messier. Humans go off on tangents, circle back, emphasize some things more than others.

5. No Strong Opinions

AI is trained to be balanced and avoid offense. Result: wishy-washy takes.

AI-style: "There are valid perspectives on both sides of this debate, and the best approach may depend on your specific circumstances."

Human-style: "Anyone who tells you X is selling something. Here's why Y is clearly better."

If an article on a controversial topic has no clear position, it's suspicious.

6. Factually Generic

AI often provides facts that are:

• True but obvious
• Common knowledge restated
• Missing the specific, unusual details that experts would include

Real expertise shows in the details that only someone who's done the work would know.

Signs of AI-Generated Images

1. Hands and Fingers

AI still struggles with hands. Look for:

• Wrong number of fingers
• Fingers that merge or bend oddly
• Hands holding objects in impossible ways

This is improving but still common.

2. Text in Images

AI can't spell. Any text in an image is often garbled or nonsensical.

3. Background Inconsistencies

• Objects that don't quite fit together
• Repeating patterns
• Architecture that doesn't make sense
• Jewelry or accessories that seem to morph

4. Too Perfect, Too Smooth

AI images often have an unnaturally perfect, slightly plastic quality. Especially:

• Skin texture
• Hair
• Fabric

5. Impossible or Surreal Elements

When you look closely, elements may:

• Melt into each other
• Have unclear boundaries
• Follow dream-logic rather than physics

Why Detection Tools Don't Work Well

You've probably heard of AI detection tools. Here's the truth:

High False Positive Rates

These tools regularly flag human-written content as AI-generated. They especially fail on:

• Non-native English speakers
• Academic writing
• Technical content
• Anyone with a "formal" writing style

Easy to Bypass

Simply editing AI content slightly often fools detectors. Or using AI-to-humanize tools. The arms race favors evasion.

Not Reliable for Decision-Making

I would never accuse someone of using AI based solely on detection tool results. They're suggestive, not definitive.

What Actually Works: Critical Reading

Instead of relying on detection tools, develop critical reading skills:

Ask: Who wrote this?

• Is there a named author?
• Do they have credentials in this area?
• Can you verify they exist?
• Is there a track record of their work?

Ask: What's the source?

• Where was this published?
• Does the outlet have editorial standards?
• Are claims backed by specific sources?
• Can you verify key facts independently?

Ask: What's the motivation?

• Who benefits from you believing this?
• Is the content trying to sell you something?
• Are there signs of sponsored content?
• Does the framing serve a particular agenda?

Ask: Does this add anything?

• Is there original reporting or research?
• Are there unique insights or experiences?
• Or is this just repackaging existing information?

Ask: Does this feel authentic?

• Is there personality and voice?
• Are there admissions of uncertainty or limitations?
• Does the author take specific, defensible positions?
• Would a real expert say this?

What This Means for Trust

Here's the uncomfortable reality: you can't trust content just because it exists. You probably never could, but AI makes this painfully obvious.

Develop Triangulation Habits

• Check multiple sources
• Prefer primary sources
• Be more skeptical of anonymous or generic content
• Weight sources with track records more highly

Follow People, Not Publications

Individual voices with reputations are harder to fake than content mills. Follow experts you can verify.

Accept Uncertainty

Sometimes you won't know if something is AI-generated. That's okay. Just factor uncertainty into how much you trust the content.

A Note on Hybrid Content

Much content in 2026 is neither purely AI nor purely human:

• Human-ideated, AI-drafted, human-edited
• AI-researched, human-written
• Human-written, AI-enhanced

This isn't inherently bad. What matters is:

• Quality of the final product
• Accuracy of claims
• Authenticity of perspective

AI assistance doesn't make content worthless. But fully automated, unreviewed content usually is.

The Bottom Line

AI content isn't always bad and human content isn't always good. What matters is:

1. Who is accountable for the claims being made
2. Can you verify the important facts
3. Does it add value beyond what you could get from a basic search
4. Is there authentic expertise behind the content

Develop your bullshit detector. It's one of the most valuable skills in the AI era.