This made sense, economically. The cost of content creation for this style of content was low-ish<\/a>, especially if you had an established website with strong authority (and, on the production side, if you didn\u2019t demand subject matter expertise). You could \u2013 and many brands did \u2013 build what were effectively content assembly lines: keyword, brief, composition, editorial revision, optimization, publication, repetition. <\/p>\n\n\n\n And the returns, at least at scale, were predictably positive.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But this approach is predicated on one condition: that the discovery and synthesis of information remains effortful for the end user. That people are using Google to search \u201cwhat is [keyword]\u201d and clicking on the first, second, or third link. <\/p>\n\n\n\n That condition no longer holds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Today, LLMs can perform real-time multi-source synthesis. Search engines return direct answers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Perplexity conducts your cursory research for you. Claude delivers you an answer in affable language. <\/p>\n\n\n\n An unnamed Google employee was once quoted<\/a> as saying sending traffic to publishers was a “necessary evil,\u201d and at this point, the overton window<\/a> seems to have opened up wide enough for them to ebb the flow of this \u201cnecessary evil.\u201d When the platform itself becomes the summarizer, and content supply has been unleashed, it no longer needs the middlemen.<\/p>\n\n\n\n And so, the rewards for creating shallow informational content are diminished. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Level-headed caveats: informational TOFU content, written in-depth and comprehensive of the customer journey, builds topical authority which helps you rank as well as establish authority in the minds of your audience. There\u2019s also marginal value, often brand awareness but some click-through-rate, in being the sources cited in AI overviews and LLMs. So there\u2019s obviously still present day value here. What we\u2019re describing is a directional trend that is clear from the past and likely to accelerate in the future. <\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n We\u2019ve been thinking about this for awhile, starting with the realization that many marketers were stuck in a \u201ctraffic trap,\u201d<\/a> spinning up high search volume, low information-density content in pursuit of traffic growth (at the expense of relevance, conversion, and revenue growth). <\/p>\n\n\n\n More recently, we wrote an essay at the earliest signals of informational TOFU content decaying in value, titled \u201cTOFU is Suffering (…Let it Die)<\/a>,\u201d taking the contrarian view that this would be principally a good thing for smart and innovative marketers. <\/p>\n\n\n\n And then this past week, a thought-provoking LinkedIn post by Ryan Law<\/a> struck a chord (…and a bit of acrimonious debate.). <\/p>\n\n\n\n He posited that future marketers will look back and marvel at “how every SaaS company had a library of rehashed Wikipedia content on their website.” This educational content, these resource centers, weren’t an innate part of marketing; they were a “product of very specific incentives created by one company (Google). and those incentives are disappearing.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n As Ryan aptly notes, “the incentives are changing. The rewards are changing.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n Methinks this has actually been the case the last several years or so, but our traffic charts still obfuscated the fact that this playbook has largely been a mirage. Additionally, featured snippets and native Google modules had already been eroding the traffic bargain. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Now, however, that trend is accelerating. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Every generation of technology that reduces friction changes not only the behavior of the user but the economic logic of the system. Just as Uber didn\u2019t just make cabs cheaper but rewired expectations around availability and convenience, LLMs don\u2019t just help summarize, they flatten the asymmetry between those who know and those who ask.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Before, discovery required effort: going to the library, searching, reading, evaluating. The internet compressed that cycle. Search engines indexed and ranked the chaos. Featured snippets further distilled it. And now, LLMs offer on-demand answers in any preferred format, often without any need to click through.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This creates a dual collapse<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n The result is that undifferentiated content, especially content that simply re-words the dominant SERP themes, is losing power. <\/p>\n\n\n\n You can see this reflected in metrics. AI Overviews reduce organic click-through by more than 30%<\/a> (note: studies vary, but most show a solid drop), and many newer sites are finding that even well-optimized content now struggles to index, let alone rank.<\/p>\n\n\n\n While some content will always be inherently valuable (explaining your company’s existence, detailing product features, helping customers achieve outcomes) this often amounts to a relatively small library in comparison to the MarTech information centers of 2017. Much of today’s content marketing has sprawled far beyond these core necessities into pure information arbitrage, a game LLMs are far better equipped to play.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Let’s be honest about the typical “SEO content process.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n It often starts by firing up a tool like Ahrefs, running content gap analyses against competitors, and pulling keywords into a spreadsheet. These are then clustered, stack-ranked (often by volume, sometimes with weighted variables for keyword difficulty<\/a>, product relevance, or customer journey stage), and turned into content briefs. These briefs are frequently a reverse-engineering of what’s already ranking, with content optimization tools explicitly identifying patterns in top-ranking content.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The brief then goes to a writer, who might be specialized in writing for, say, MarTech blogs, but often lacks firsthand experience in the subject matter. They become assemblers of “book reports,” synthesizing existing information rather than injecting new data, unique insights, or firsthand experience. The piece is edited, perhaps optimized to hit a certain tool-based score, adorned with stock photos<\/a> (or now, AI-generated) images, and published on a blog that looks and feels like countless others, featuring the same “how-to,” “what-is,” and “benefits-of” articles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The result? No real differentiation. Sea of sameness.<\/a> No alpha.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The problem isn\u2019t that this doesn\u2019t work at all. <\/p>\n\n\n\n As with anything, the future is here, it\u2019s just not evenly distributed<\/a> (i.e. if you find an underoptimized industry, you could probably make this work well). The problem is that it used to work too<\/em> well, and now it doesn\u2019t work enough \u2013 or at the very least, the expected value equation doesn\u2019t make sense anymore. <\/p>\n\n\n\n I think we need a new process, one that decouples keywords from content strategy (real controversial, I know\u2026). <\/p>\n\n\n\n At Omniscient, we\u2019ve modeled something we are tentatively calling the Ikigai of SEO<\/a>. The concept is simple: reverse the order of operations. Instead of starting with keywords, you layer on SEO or channel data to stack-rank and prioritize, cluster and structure your roadmap, and optimize for channel distribution. Your starting point, your base layer of research, is formed instead by buyer research, voice of customer, pain points, and jobs-to-be-done, which is then mapped onto product utility, competitive differentiation, messaging, and features.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In other words, SEO (or GEO) becomes a lens for distribution, not a map for ideation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So if the returns to simple informational content are declining, where\u2019s the remaining alpha?<\/p>\n\n\n\n It\u2019s in the inverse of what machines are good at. Not replication, but originality. Not compression, but context. Not speed, but specificity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Several dimensions still create real value:<\/p>\n\n\n\n It may sound abstract, but the real test is this: if a generic prompt to ChatGPT could recreate your post in under a minute, it has no moat.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In any case, even ignoring any changes in channel effectiveness, you can simply rethink how you plan and sculpt a given piece of content, a campaign, or an experience: Instead of crafting briefs based solely on reverse-engineering the SERPs, prioritize what is most meaningful<\/em>: What unique value are you adding to the conversation? How does your brand or product logically fit in? Then, frankly, automate the cursory SERP analysis and optimization functions. It’s a low-alpha activity, so streamline it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When it comes to writers and editors, shift from generic content creators to those with genuine subject matter expertise or the skill to interview and collaborate with SMEs to inject firsthand experience and novel talking points.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This shift is, I believe, a fantastic development for users and for ambitious, creative, and curious marketers who were tired of the assembly-line approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As I mentioned in a previous LinkedIn discussion<\/a>, “SEO was too easy for too long… Did we really want to spend the golden days of our careers publishing ultimate guides and pushing links to them to drive vanity traffic? Not me.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n Simply summarizing information and hosting it on your blog was a low-cost, high-value play for a long time, forming the backbone of much B2B SEO<\/a>. But common sense dictates that its value had to erode with increased supply and more efficient platform delivery (featured snippets, AI answers). While some niche advantages for information arbitrage may linger, if your core content strategy can be replicated by a single ChatGPT prompt, its value is fragile and declining.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The path forward? Index on hard-to-fake advantages<\/strong>, novel data and information<\/strong>, and yes, even creative brand marketing initiatives<\/strong> that generate genuine buzz, conversation, and affinity. <\/p>\n\n\n\n It’s time to lift some heavy-ass weights.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n\n\n\n Want more insights like this? Subscribe to our <\/a>Field <\/a>Notes<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" For the last decade, much of B2B content has operated…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":6694,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"content-type":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[184,25],"tags":[],"wf_post_folders":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-5878","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-field-notes","8":"category-seo"},"yoast_head":"\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/beomniscient.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/image-143-1024x445.png\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/beomniscient.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/image-144-1024x810.png\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nThe Writing on the Wall<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Google, LLMs, and the Frictionless Future<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
The Constraints of Our Current Toolkit and Mindset<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
No More Book Reports<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/beomniscient.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/image-145.png\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nA New Paradigm: Where True Value Lies<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Embrace the Difficult, Create the Novel<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n