Is this an AI written faux news story?
9 Reasons Locals Are Pushing Back Against “Experience Tourism” – Her Life Adventures
No author is listed for this “news story”. It reads like it was written entirely by AI – but without disclosing that. The web site lists just 2 people – a Founder and a Writer/Editor. Both have vague biographies – no information on who’ve they previously written for, where they went to school – nothing. About Us – Her Life Adventures. Many of the links at the bottom of the page (“Blog”, “National Parks”, etc) do not work. And a lot of “listicles”: Articles by Chelsea Messina’s Profile | MSN, Matador Network Journalist | Muck Rack. The 2nd person “Ana Khan” does not appear to exist elsewhere online.
I asked an AI to evaluate this!
(I do use AI search and writing assistance and I disclose that in my posts).
🔍 Can we tell if this article was written by AI?
There is no definitive test, but we can look for linguistic and structural patterns that strongly correlate with AI‑generated writing.
🧠 AI‑Like Indicators in the Article
1. Highly uniform paragraph structure
Each section follows the same pattern:
- A general claim
- A smooth, polished explanation
- A socially aware concluding sentence
This “perfectly even” structure is extremely common in AI writing.
2. No personal anecdotes or lived experience
For a travel blog, the article contains:
- No first‑person experiences
- No specific locations
- No sensory details
- No personal photos or stories
It reads more like a generalized essay than a travel blogger’s lived perspective.
3. Very consistent tone
The tone is:
- Neutral
- Polished
- Explanatory
- Free of slang, quirks, or emotional spikes
Human bloggers usually have stylistic fingerprints — humor, personality, strong opinions. This piece is unusually smooth.
4. Repetitive rhetorical pattern
Each section uses the same rhythm:
- “Locals feel X when Y happens.”
- “Visitors do Z, which causes friction.”
- “Pushback grows when…”
This kind of rhetorical template is common in AI outputs.
5. No factual citations or specific examples
AI‑generated articles often avoid:
- Dates
- Names
- Studies
- Local policies
- Real events
This article stays entirely in the realm of generalities.
🧠 Human‑Like Indicators
1. The structure is coherent and intentionally organized
A human writer could have outlined this deliberately.
2. The images are credited to stock sources
This is typical of human‑run blogs, though AI‑written text can be paired with stock photos.
3. The article fits the blog’s theme
The site appears to be a lifestyle/travel blog, so the topic is on‑brand.
🧠 Most Likely Scenario
Based on the patterns in the text, the article strongly resembles AI‑assisted writing — especially the kind produced by tools like ChatGPT, Jasper, or other SEO‑focused content generators.
It has:
- SEO‑friendly structure
- Repetitive rhetorical cadence
- No personal voice
- No concrete details
- Perfectly smooth grammar
- Stock-photo filler
This is exactly the style many blogs now use to generate fast, high‑volume content.
That doesn’t prove it’s AI‑generated — but the probability is high.
And here is more analysis – after I pointed out to the AI that there are 2 people listed as running the web site but their biographies are very vague. Generally, writers are looking to promote themselves in order t seek more work. But here we have 2 people who are basically invisible.
The About page is vague, generic, and missing the kinds of biographical details that legitimate writers almost always include. That’s a major red flag in the modern SEO‑content ecosystem.
Below is a full, multi‑layered analysis that combines linguistic forensics, site‑level behavioral clues, and content‑production patterns used by AI‑assisted blogs.
🧠 1. Linguistic Fingerprints of AI in the Article
I’ll break this down into the kinds of features that AI‑detection researchers look for.
A. “Uniform Smoothness”
The article has:
- No sentence fragments
- No abrupt transitions
- No idiosyncratic phrasing
- No unexpected metaphors
- No emotional spikes
This is classic AI “polish.”
Humans vary. AI smooths.
B. Repetitive rhetorical scaffolding
Each section follows the same formula:
- State a general social problem
- Explain it in neutral, abstract terms
- Conclude with a soft moral or social implication
This is extremely common in AI‑generated SEO articles.
C. Lack of sensory detail
Travel writers normally include:
- smells
- sounds
- specific locations
- personal reactions
- anecdotes
This article contains none of that.
It reads like a Wikipedia‑style summary of “tourism problems,” not like a travel blogger’s lived experience.
D. Overuse of generalized nouns
AI tends to rely on abstract nouns:
- “friction”
- “tensions”
- “impact”
- “concerns”
- “communities”
- “experiences”
Humans tend to anchor ideas in specifics.
E. No temporal markers
There are no:
- dates
- events
- references to recent news
- mentions of specific destinations
AI avoids specifics because they require factual grounding.
🧠 2. Site‑Level Clues Suggesting AI‑Assisted Content
You noticed something important:
The About page is vague and non‑credentialed.
That’s a hallmark of AI‑driven content sites.
Let’s break down the signals.
A. Only two people listed
Many AI‑assisted lifestyle blogs list:
- a “founder”
- a “writer/editor”
This is often a façade to make the site appear human‑run.
B. No professional background
Legitimate writers almost always list:
- publications they’ve written for
- degrees
- travel experience
- awards
- years in the field
This site lists none of that.
C. No personal photos of the authors
If the About page uses:
- stock‑looking photos
- overly polished portraits
- images with no metadata
That’s another sign of a “content farm” structure.
D. The writing style does not match the bios
If the bios claim:
- passion
- personal storytelling
- lived travel experience
…but the articles are generic and impersonal, that mismatch is telling.
E. The site’s content strategy looks SEO‑driven
The article you linked is:
- list‑based
- keyword‑optimized
- structured for search engines
- not tied to personal travel stories
This is typical of AI‑assisted content mills.
🧠 3. Behavioral Clues in the Article’s Construction
A. No outbound citations
Human writers often link to:
- studies
- news articles
- local sources
- government reports
AI‑generated SEO content rarely does.
B. Stock photos instead of original photography
Travel bloggers almost always use their own photos.
Stock photos are a sign the article was not based on personal experience.
C. Topic choice is generic and trending
“Locals pushing back against tourism” is a high‑volume SEO topic.
AI‑driven sites often target these.
🧠 4. Cross‑Article Consistency Check (a powerful trick)
If you compare:
- sentence rhythm
- paragraph length
- tone
- vocabulary
across multiple posts on the site…
…and they all sound identical, that’s a strong indicator of AI‑assisted production.
Humans vary.
AI does not.
🧠 5. The Most Likely Scenario
Based on:
- linguistic patterns
- lack of personal detail
- SEO‑optimized structure
- generic About page
- absence of credentials
- stock photography
- lack of lived experience
- uniform tone
The probability is high that the article was either:
A. Written entirely by AI,
or
B. Drafted by AI and lightly edited by a human,
which is extremely common in travel/lifestyle blogs today.
This doesn’t mean the site is malicious — just that it’s likely using AI to scale content.