This Website Runs on AI: One Year of an AI-Operated Business Site
We sell AI implementations. The obvious question any sensible buyer asks is: do you actually use this stuff yourselves, or do you just talk about it? Fair question. Here is the fullest answer we can give: the website you are reading is largely built, maintained and written with AI, under human supervision, and it has been for a year.
This article is both a case study and a disclosure. If you have wondered how much of a real company’s web presence can be handed to AI today, this is what it looks like from the inside.
What the AI actually does
Nearly everything operational. The site was migrated from a website builder to WordPress with AI doing the heavy lifting: page structure, theme configuration, image optimisation, redirects, security hardening. Since then, AI drafts the blog articles, prepares the SEO metadata, selects and processes images, applies tags and categories, publishes on schedule, and shares each article to our LinkedIn page.
A person reviews every piece before it ships. That is not a legal fig leaf; it is where most of the remaining work lives. The AI produces a competent draft in minutes. Deciding whether the argument is one we actually stand behind, whether the numbers match our experience on real projects, whether the tone sounds like us: that stays human, and we think it should.
What worked better than expected
Consistency, mostly. A small consultancy does not have a content team. Before this setup, publishing was whatever the founder managed between projects, which in practice meant rarely. With AI in the loop the blog has covered all four of our service lines every month, each article internally linked, each with proper metadata, on a schedule a marketing agency would charge real money for.
Maintenance surprised us too. Cache configuration, font self-hosting, image formats, structured data: the unglamorous technical work that sites accumulate got done, because asking an AI to do a tedious job costs nothing but the review time.
What broke, and what we learned
Plenty, and the failures are instructive.
- Multi-layer caching produced stale pages that survived three different purge attempts. The fix required understanding the hosting platform’s cache tiers, not clicking the purge button harder.
- SEO plugin fields refused to save through the official API and had to be set through the editor itself. Software has corners, and AI finds all of them.
- Early drafts had a recognisable AI accent: tidy lists, confident generalities, no scars. The review pass exists precisely to add the scars.
The pattern across every failure is the same: AI is a tireless and fast operator, and a mediocre judge. Pair it with a person who knows what good looks like and you get leverage. Let it run unsupervised and you get a plausible-looking site that slowly drifts away from reality.
The honest disclosure
Every article on this blog, including this one, is researched and drafted with the assistance of Claude (Anthropic) and reviewed, edited and approved by a person at Amazing Projects before publication. Bylines on this site refer to our content team, not to an individual author. We think AI-assisted publishing is nothing to hide and everything to disclose, so this paragraph is now our standing policy, linked from every post.
What this means if you are considering the same
You do not need a content team to have a professional web presence. You need three things: an AI capable of doing real operational work, a person with taste and domain knowledge to review it, and a workflow that makes review non-optional. We build exactly these setups for clients as part of our AI implementation services, from content operations like ours to invoicing and back-office automation and AI-powered digital signage.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the content on this site written by AI?
It is drafted with AI assistance and reviewed, edited and approved by a person before publication. Nothing is published unreviewed.
Does AI-assisted content hurt SEO?
Search engines state that they reward helpful content regardless of how it is produced, and penalise mass-produced content created to game rankings. Human review and real expertise are the difference between the two.
How much time does the human review take?
Roughly 20 to 30 minutes per article in our experience, against several hours to write one from scratch. The review is the job; the typing is not.
Editorial note: This article was researched and drafted with the assistance of Claude (Anthropic), and reviewed and approved by Amazing Projects before publication.
