Industries
SEO for affiliates
Affiliate articles are recommendations. A recommendation you did not earn is an ad pretending to be a review. Readers and search engines have both learned the difference.
The useful affiliate page helps a person choose among real options using criteria you can explain. It says how you get paid, what you tested, and what you did not. It gets updated when the product or the price structure changes.
An AI writer is good at the shape of a roundup and bad at the truth of it. It will invent hands-on detail, award a "best" badge, and skip the disclosure. If that is the draft you publish, you are building a site you will have to retract.
Do not describe a test you did not run
If you have not used the product, you can still compare published specs, policies, and who the product is for, and you must say that is what you did. You cannot describe the unboxing, the battery after a week, or "we found." Those sentences are a test. Inventing them is the whole scandal.
When you have used it, put the conditions in the brief: how long, which version, what you were trying to do. The draft should not upgrade a weekend into a year-long study.
Criteria before winners
Decide the criteria before you ask for a draft. Price is not the only one, and "best overall" is usually a way to avoid choosing. For a tool, criteria might be the job it replaces, the lock-in, the export, and what happens when you cancel. Then score options against that list.
Update the date when you recheck. Affiliate offers change. A 2024 winner left in place during 2026 is a recommendation you are no longer willing to make, even if the link still pays.
One audience, not every keyword with volume
A site that reviews hiking stoves and mortgage lenders is not a site. It is a container. Pick the reader and the decision. Supporting articles should teach the skill that makes the buying guide make sense, not chase an unrelated term because a tool colored it green.
Thin "what is" pages that exist only to link to a partner are the pages to stop writing. If the explanation would not help someone who never clicks, it is not an article.
Use the writer for structure, then replace the facts
Let a model propose an outline and the questions a buyer forgets to ask. Then fill the answers from your notes, the manufacturer's current page, and your own use. Delete any sentence you cannot source. That is slower than full automation and it is the only version worth ranking.
Images of the product should be yours or licensed. A generated photo of a gadget you recommend is another small lie on a page that is already asking for trust.
Topics worth writing
- How you test one category, including what you refuse to pretend
- A comparison that names criteria before it names a winner
- Who should not buy the product you otherwise recommend
- What changed since the last update, in the offer or the product
- How to cancel, export, or return, because that is part of the recommendation
- A skill article that helps the reader even if they never use your link
Before you publish
- The disclosure is next to the recommendation, in plain language.
- No hands-on detail appears unless you have the notes.
- Product names, prices, and plan limits were rechecked.
- The "best for" lines match the criteria, not the highest commission.
- The page has an updated date a human set.
Questions
Can AI write the first draft of a review?
It can write the questions and the structure. The claims about use have to come from you. If you publish the draft untouched, you will publish fiction.
How many products belong in a roundup?
As many as you can tell apart with your criteria. Seven identical cards with swapped adjectives is a page people bounce from.
What if the merchant wants specific wording?
If you would not say it, do not publish it. A brief you disagree with is a reason to skip the program.
Do informational posts need a disclosure?
If they contain an affiliate link, yes. If they do not, do not dress them up as reviews.
