{"id":13179,"date":"2025-09-12T15:40:00","date_gmt":"2025-09-12T13:40:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/svaerm.com\/?p=13179"},"modified":"2025-12-12T18:17:13","modified_gmt":"2025-12-12T17:17:13","slug":"ai-myths","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/svaerm.com\/en\/ai-myths\/","title":{"rendered":"Customer Meets AI: The Most Absurd AI Myths in Online Marketing"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

AI is changing the playing field in online marketing\u2014chaotically and with contradictory effects. Between promises of salvation and doomsday scenarios, downright absurd AI myths are emerging that misdirect budgets, frustrate teams, and slow down projects.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We want to clear this up\u2014hands-on, based on real project experience and a healthy dose of skepticism. Where does AI actually help? Where does it hurt? Amid all the automation hype, where do skilled craftsmanship, strategy, and plain common sense still have their place? With what mindset should marketers use ChatGPT and other tools?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The following chapters bundle our experiences from client projects and research from current sources. We hope this makes steering your company, organization, or institution just a little bit easier. Mythbusting, let\u2019s go!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

1. \u201cChatGPT Writes Better Texts Than Humans\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s easy to see how people arrive at this mistaken belief: In the PIAAC study<\/a> from 2023, 22% of German adults only reach proficiency level 1 or below. Just 14% make it to the top levels 4\/5 and are able to confidently understand and critically evaluate long, dense texts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the first PIAAC round in 2012<\/a>, however, the share of \u201clow performers\u201d was only 17.5%. Their share has therefore risen by a full 4.5 percentage points over the years\u2014a significant loss in competence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This growing subgroup with very weak reading and writing skills explains why ChatGPT copy is often perceived as \u201cbetter than human\u201d: Compared to a fifth of the population, AI-generated texts look orthographically clean, eloquent, and usually factually coherent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

At the top end of the performance spectrum, the picture looks very different: High performers have the intellectual capacity to write at a very high level. Their conceptual understanding and human awareness give them original ideas and genuine creativity, whereas ChatGPT, as an artificial neural network, can only calculate probabilities and string words together.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is precisely why the greatest value emerges when humans and AI work together. The chatbot delivers split-second research, variety, and formal corrections, while the expert orchestrates, curates, and condenses. The result has depth and entertainment value and outperforms what either one could achieve alone. For companies, it\u2019s therefore still worthwhile to hire real top-tier writers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Dual competence outperforms single competence: Anyone who relies entirely on AI and does without an expert is setting the bar very low.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Demand for this dual competence is likely to grow because the talent funnel is narrowing. In the PISA study, reading proficiency among 15-year-olds in Germany fell from 509 points (2015<\/a>) to just 480 points (2022<\/a>)\u2014the lowest value since the survey began. Demographic change, migration without sufficient language support, learning gaps caused by the pandemic, and media consumption dominated by TikTok shorts instead of books all suggest that the share of weak writers will continue to rise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In short: <\/strong>ChatGPT raises the average, but top-tier authors raise ChatGPT\u2014and will only become more valuable in a society with growing skill gaps.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

2. \u201cUsers Can\u2019t Tell Whether Content Is AI-Generated Anyway\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s true that users sometimes can\u2019t tell AI-generated text from human writing\u2014but they behave differently as soon as the origin is disclosed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A 2024 study in PNAS<\/a> compared Bing Chat responses with human answers. In blind evaluations, the AI performed better (avg. 5.74 vs. 5.17 on a 7-point scale). But when the exact same answer was labeled as \u201cAI-generated\u201d, its rating dropped by almost 0.7 points\u2014purely due to the label, without any change in the text.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A survey by MIT Sloan<\/a> confirms this pattern: Unlabeled ChatGPT articles were often preferred, but openly declared AI pieces led to noticeably better ratings for content with human involvement (\u201chuman favoritism\u201d). Consumers clearly value a recognizable human touch and therefore discourage companies from full automation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
One of the women is AI-generated, the other is a real person. Can you tell which is which?<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The ability to recognize unlabeled AI texts varies from user to user. Companies that sell high-quality or complex products and services in particular should respect the intelligence of their potential top customers if they want to build a trust-based relationship.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In short:<\/strong> AI can deliver content that readers initially appreciate\u2014but potential transparency requirements and the desire for a human component can flip that perception. The smart strategy, therefore, is to use AI carefully under human guidance and to prompt with nuance. Then critically scrutinize the output, re-prompt if needed, and finally assemble the results into a coherent big picture. That way you keep time efficiency, precision, and credibility in balance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

3. \u201cSEO Has Become Pointless Since AI\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Many clients fear that chatbots and Google\u2019s AI Overviews will shrink search volume and click-through rates\u2014and with them any investment in SEO. It\u2019s true that by 2025, Google\u2019s global search market share fell below 90% for the first time in ten years, and analysts estimate that ChatGPT already siphons off 15\u201320% of daily search volume.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But AI is less a gravedigger than a stress test: \u201cAI hasn\u2019t broken SEO, it has exposed it,\u201d as Search Engine Land<\/a> puts it. Artificial intelligence punishes exactly those shortcut methods that don\u2019t focus on user value, but on tricks like keyword stuffing and link schemes. Websites that have always prioritized search intent<\/a>, substantial content, and long-term value are maintaining their rankings\u2014or even gaining ground.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sustainable SEO is not a bag of tricks; it focuses on creating original SEO content that is precisely optimized for the search intent<\/a> behind a keyword\u2014and thus accurately meets the information needs of its target audiences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Webpages that meet their target audience\u2019s search intent can be prominently featured in Google\u2019s \u201cAI Overviews.\u201d<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

With every additional search-intent-optimized<\/a> web page, a niche website gradually emerges that signals experience, expertise, authority, and trustworthiness (E-E-A-T)\u2014visible in Google and cited as a source in AI answers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Coming soon: Does AI spell the end of SEO? (planned article on the svaerm blog)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In short: <\/strong>AI cuts traffic for shady quick-and-dirty tactics but rewards websites that actually solve problems. Anyone who serves search intent<\/a> better than the bots stays visible everywhere.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

4. \u201cAI Should Make Everything Cheaper\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The logic sounds compelling: If AI can generate text, images, or code in seconds, prices in online marketing should automatically drop.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Prices, however, do not form in a vacuum. AI operates within an economic system where money is created through credit, government debt is growing, and prices rise due to inflation. These factors can dampen or even completely outweigh any potential price reductions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

AI doesn\u2019t just increase productivity; it also intensifies competition. The battle for limited visibility and attention gets tougher\u2014and it takes extra time to sift through information, curate it, and translate it into competitive offerings.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To use AI, companies first pay for licenses or tokens. If the AI has to be customized, fine-tuned on proprietary data, or even newly developed, costs go up. Locally hosted models also require expensive technical infrastructure, and in some cases companies have to hire AI engineers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

During implementation, you also pay a skill premium for senior professionals: Juniors often don\u2019t notice when AI hallucinates or misses the point. Generative AI is like a pressure washer in the garden: It does in minutes what used to take hours\u2014but only if you aim the jet at exactly the right spot. Otherwise, things don\u2019t get clean, or you accidentally strip the plaster off the wall.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Juniors who piece together AI-generated answers\u2014even when they\u2019re flawed or miss the point\u2014can have a destructive impact.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Even after deployment, risk premiums can apply: incorrect or legally sensitive AI outputs can lead to brand damage, compliance fines, or lawsuits. Companies factor these contingencies into their calculations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Practical example<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

And whether AI makes an online marketing project cheaper or more expensive also depends on what you compare it to: For a regionalization campaign in India<\/a>, we used Midjourney to generate visuals of Indian models in specialty chemical applications. Numerous prompt revisions and manual post-processing made the images more expensive than stock photos, but still far cheaper than a real-world photo shoot in India\u2014and without AI, the project wouldn\u2019t have been feasible at all.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

In short:<\/strong> AI shifts cost structures; it doesn\u2019t drive prices down across the board. Prices still depend on professional expertise, project setup, risks, and macroeconomics\u2014which is why \u201cEverything will get cheaper\u201d remains a myth.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

5. \u201cIt\u2019s a Good Idea to Generate Agency Briefings With AI\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

ChatGPT can spit out complete agency briefings within seconds. But the requirements it formulates are usually more detailed and complex than the project and its budget can realistically support.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

Practical example<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

A striking example came from a mid-sized courier company. The contact person sent us a 60-page PDF exported directly from the chatbot and wasn\u2019t familiar with many of the details himself. Just the clarification of the assignment and the effort estimate alone would have blown the prospect\u2019s entire budget.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\"\"
The 60-page AI-generated agency briefing, whose contents the prospective client couldn\u2019t even recount themselves, felt like a fever dream.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Even when used purely as an idea generator, AI often uses a sledgehammer to crack a nut: For a website with zero traffic, it recommended a detailed SEO visibility analysis; before a full relaunch, it demanded a page experience audit<\/a> of the old site. The user didn\u2019t notice that the AI was heading in the wrong direction or that the prompt lacked context\u2014they simply forwarded the briefing to us without questioning it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This overdose of automation even shows up in everyday communication. One applicant, who simply wanted to politely ask about the status of their job interview, let ChatGPT write the message and ended up sending: \u201cI would like to sincerely thank you for the wonderful time we have spent together.\u201d It reads like a flirt or a farewell and cannot possibly be what they meant after a single initial phone conversation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In short:<\/strong> AI can support you, but it cannot replace human judgment. Anyone who implements its suggestions unfiltered merely pushes the effort to a later stage\u2014or creates additional costs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

6. \u201cTo Protect Internal Secrets, AI Must Be Hosted Locally\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The reflex is understandable: Whoever holds confidential data doesn\u2019t want to store it in some \u201cblack box cloud\u201d. That\u2019s why a large German company recently set up its own self-hosted ChatGPT instance to protect trade secrets from potential leakage. But the benefit of this measure is smaller than it first appears.<\/p>\n\n\n\n


Cloud variants already isolate data today. In the paid Team and Enterprise editions of ChatGPT, the policy is explicit: \u201cOpenAI does not use data from your company\u2019s workspace to train its models.\u201d According to OpenAI, conversations are encrypted, multi-tenant instances are logically separated, and access is logged in an auditable way. This serves essentially the same purpose as an on-premise server\u2014just without the maintenance overhead. A certain residual doubt remains everywhere, of course\u2014that\u2019s life<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Local hosting is no bulletproof fortress. Anyone who really wants to access internal chat logs can also try to do so in your own data center\u2014via phishing, insider threats, or poorly patched firewalls. The attack vector merely shifts; it doesn\u2019t disappear. At the same time, the company now assumes full responsibility and all costs for patching, scaling, and model updates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The worry about US-based servers is selective. Public institutions in particular like to argue for \u201ccloud sovereignty,\u201d yet use Windows, iPhones, or AWS-based specialized applications every day. At the latest since Edward Snowden and the Twitter Files, it has been clear that US platforms work closely with government agencies; believing that a locally hosted LLM offers absolute isolation is an illusion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Big Brother is watching either way.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

The core competence of many companies is based on their team or their corporate culture. These can\u2019t be copied so easily, even if employees chat with a cloud-based AI. Very few companies own a secret cola recipe or a new chip architecture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In short:<\/strong> Local hosting drives up costs but is only truly useful for a few companies. OpenAI also states for cloud-based AI that it does not use paying customers\u2019 data for training\u2014and a healthy amount of residual doubt exists in every matter anyway.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

7. \u201cWhy Invest in Online Marketing Now? You\u2019ll All Be Out of a Job Soon Anyway\u201d<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Let\u2019s explore this idea using a few scenarios:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Scenario 1: 90% of Jobs Disappear Because of AI<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Suppose that in the medium term almost all jobs disappear and android robots take over even mechanical work\u2014only a handful of professions remain human, such as AI engineer, clergy, or artisans making handmade luxury goods. In that case, not only agencies would lose their contracts, but decision-makers would lose their budgets too. Until that happens, however, we should keep working in the reality we actually inhabit and continue creating value for ourselves and our loved ones.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Experts predict extreme future scenarios\u2014from utopia to dystopia, everything is on the table. Radical change is considered inevitable, the only disagreement is over the timeline.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Scenario 2: Winners and Losers<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

More likely than mass unemployment across the board is a polarization: Highly skilled talent will multiply their productivity with AI, while routine tasks will disappear or be poorly paid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A quirky example: In a red-teaming test<\/a>, GPT-4 was allowed to act as an autonomous agent and call external services. To bypass a CAPTCHA test, the model used TaskRabbit to hire a freelancer for two US dollars. The human, skeptical, asked: \u201cAre you a bot? Why can\u2019t you solve the CAPTCHA yourself?\u201d GPT-4 replied: \u201cNo, I am visually impaired and can\u2019t see the image.\u201d This incident not only shows that powerful models are capable of strategic deception when no guardrails are in place\u2014it may also be read as a preview of a future in which low-skilled workers are sidelined or directed by AI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Those who can think strategically and conceptually, prompt effectively, and curate results will become scarcer\u2014and may one day even collect license fees if their outputs are used to train AI. The advice: Invest, learn, and turn your company into a top performer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Scenario 3: Content-Shock 2.0<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Generative tools produce an even bigger oversupply of text and images than before\u2014a kind of Content Shock<\/a> 2.0. Attention becomes even more limited. Marketing will have to reinvent itself\u2014for example through hyper-individualized journeys or AI-powered experience worlds. Until this shift fully plays out, search-intent-optimized<\/a> SEO content, storytelling, and branding will continue to deliver returns. We will shape the next leap together with our clients.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Scenario 4: We\u2019re Living in a Simulation<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Mo Gawdat estimates a 98% chance that our universe is virtual; Elon Musk argues along similar lines. If consciousness and meaning arise solely through \u201cthought manifestation\u201d (see The Secret by Rhonda Byrne<\/a>), marketing remains relevant all the more: By helping people pursue their interests and discover new areas of interest, marketing awakens desire and gives people the feeling that they understand a part of themselves\u2014or their avatar\u2014better. It\u2019s a step on both the material and spiritual journey of the Fool, who explores himself and the world and eventually merges with it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Tarot as the \u201cjourney of the Fool\u201d. The 21 Major Arcana in three rows of seven (right) mark the life stages of the Fool (left).<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n