A Lot of Legal Content Is Now AI Garbage - Here’s How to Avoid It

In 2023, I was concerned that generative AI would render content marketers like my company obsolete. In 2025, I’m more worried about the flood of AI-powered “legal content marketing agencies” that are putting law firms at risk. Here’s the paradox: The market is flooded with people who claim they can write legal content, but finding content writers for law firms who actually deliver high-quality, compliant material? Harder than ever.

Before Gen AI, qualified legal content marketing writers were scarce, but at least you knew what you were getting. Now, anyone with a ChatGPT account can claim to produce AI-generated legal content at scale, but they often lack the knowledge and expertise to produce high-quality, accurate and compliant content that will get results.

 

For Law Firms, the Stakes Are High

Legal content sits at the intersection of bar advertising rules, Google’s YMYL standards, and potential malpractice exposure. An AI hallucination about a statute of limitations isn’t just embarrassing, it’s a liability.

If you’re outsourcing your law firm’s content creation in 2025, you need a different vetting process. Here’s what I tell every lawyer who asks me how to spot the difference between a quality content partner and someone who’s just really good at prompting ChatGPT.

 

Why AI Made Everything Harder

When ChatGPT launched, the barrier to entry in content creation vanished overnight. Prior to 2023, the competition was among specialized legal content agencies. Post-2023, it’s $50 Fiverr posts and marketing agencies that pivoted to legal by adjusting prompts.

Many industries can tolerate generic AI content. Legal can’t. You’re dealing with:

• Bar advertising rules that vary by state. What flies in Texas might trigger a complaint in New York.
• Google’s YMYL standards. Legal content falls under “Your Money or Your Life,” the category Google scrutinizes through its E-E-A-T framework (Experience, Expertise, Authority, Trust) —something raw, unedited AI content cannot demonstrate.
• Legal accuracy requirements. AI hallucinates. It invents case citations, misquotes statutes and gets deadlines wrong. In some cases, AI has even led to lawyers being sanctioned.
• Copyright vulnerability. Pure AI-generated content isn’t copyrightable under current guidance from the United States Copyright Office. You need “substantial human authorship” to own what you’re paying for.

Nowadays, you’re not just hiring a writer. You’re vetting whether a writer uses AI responsibly, understands legal ethics, and can produce bar-compliant content that won’t trigger complaints or Google penalties. Maintaining legal content quality is important for both reputation and compliance.

 

Red Flags: Warning Signs of Low-Quality Content Marketers

In my conversations with law firms over the past two years, I’ve seen patterns. Here are the red flags that should make you pause before signing a contract.

 

Red Flag No. 1: The Pricing Is Too Good to Be True

I’ve seen pitches for $50 blog posts. Let’s do the math together. Quality legal content requires research, writing, fact-checking, editing and bar compliance review. If someone is charging $50 for a 1,500-word article, how much time can they possibly spend on your content? The answer is none. They’re copying ChatGPT output and changing a few words.

Quality legal research takes time. Jurisdiction-specific research can’t be rushed. If the price seems impossible, it is.

 

Red Flag No. 2: They Have No Legal Credentials

Would you hire a graphic designer to handle discovery? Then why hire a general marketing agency to produce legal content marketing for your firm? Look specifically for law firm content writers with legal backgrounds, paralegal experience, or demonstrated expertise in creating bar-compliance content. Generic marketers don’t know what they don’t know.

 

Red Flag No. 3: They Can’t Explain Their Fact-Checking Process

Ask how they verify legal statements. A quality content writer should explain:

• How they verify statutes and case citations.
• Who reviews for legal accuracy.
• What happens if they cite a nonexistent case.
• Whether they have Westlaw or LexisNexis access.

Red flag responses: “We check everything carefully” or “Our AI is very accurate.” If they can’t walk you through their process, they don’t have one.

 

Red Flag No. 4: The Portfolio Is Full of AI Tells

Pull up three samples. Search for “delve” or “navigate the complexities.” Multiple hits? That’s AI-generated content with minimal editing. AI patterns include:

• “Navigate the complexities,” “In today’s fast-paced world,” “Delve into.”
• Every paragraph has three to four sentences.
• Headers on every paragraph.
• Excessive bullet points.
• No personality or stories.

Generic AI content reads like it was written by someone who’s never talked to a human. Because it was.

 

Red Flag No. 5: They Promise Impossibly Fast Turnaround

It’s a major red flag when a legal content marketing writer or agency agrees to send 50 articles in a 24-hour turnaround. Chances are, you will receive raw AI content that has not been properly edited for legal and ethical compliance.

 

Red Flag No. 6: They Don’t Ask Questions About Your State Bar Rules

If your content writer or agency doesn’t ask where you practice within the first 10 minutes of your conversation, be very concerned. Advertising rules vary significantly from state to state. Not inquiring about what state you practice in means they are not thinking about compliance — potentially putting you and your firm at risk.

 

Red Flag No. 7: ‘AI-Powered’ Is Their Main Selling Point

When “AI-powered” is the headline feature instead of legal expertise or accuracy, run.

I’m not anti-AI. We use AI for research, topic ideation, outlining and efficiency — and we’d be doing our clients a disservice by not leveraging AI. But when someone leads with “our AI technology writes content in seconds,” they’re selling speed over quality. They’re selling the tool instead of the expertise. Quality content partners mention AI as a tool in their process, not as the product itself.

 

Red Flag No. 8: They Resist Questions About AI Usage

In almost three short years, AI has become an integral part of the content creation process. I’m of the opinion that it’s another tool in our toolbox, and we should be using large language models, aka LLMs, to create better content, faster and more cost-effectively for our clients.

All of that said, any content marketer you hire should be transparent about how they’re using AI. If a writer or agency is reticent about disclosing their AI usage, it’s likely because they are cutting corners and know that their process does not justify their rate. 

Some red flags to look out for include:

• Evasive answers about AI use.
• Claiming a “proprietary process” without explaining the basics.
• A lack of transparency about human versus AI contribution.

A good legal content marketing partner will openly explain their process. For example, an acceptable answer may be: “We use AI for research and initial drafts, but every article is substantially reworked by a human writer with a legal background and reviewed for compliance and accuracy before delivery.” If they won’t have that conversation, they’re hiding something.

 

Green Flags: What Quality Content Partners Look Like

Now for the good news: There are quality content partners for law firms out there. Here’s what separates them from the AI mills.

 

Green Flag No. 1: They Have Legal Training or Deep Legal Industry Experience

When finding content writers for law firms, prioritize those with J.D.s, former paralegal experience, or five-plus years of specialized legal writing. These writers understand legal nuances and produce high-quality legal content. The difference shows up in the content. They know when something sounds wrong and catch errors AI wouldn’t recognize. They understand the context that makes legal content credible.

 

Green Flag No. 2: They’re Transparent About AI Usage

Quality legal writers explain where AI assists, the distinction between AI-assisted and AI-generated content, and the role of human oversight. For example, “AI helps with research, humans draft, and attorneys review every piece.”

 

Green Flag No. 3: They Have an Attorney Review Process

High-quality law firm content should go through attorney review. Not someone who took a business law class in college — actual licensed attorneys who review for legal accuracy, bar compliance and jurisdiction-specific issues. Ask for names, credentials and bar numbers. If they can’t provide this information, they’re not doing attorney review; they’re just claiming they are.

 

Green Flag No. 4: They Understand E-E-A-T and YMYL

Google’s E-E-A-T framework isn’t optional for legal content. Quality partners should be able to explain:

• What E-E-A-T means (Experience, Expertise, Authority, Trust).
• Why it matters specifically for legal content.
• How they optimize content for it.
• What YMYL (Your Money or Your Life) standards require.

If they look confused when you mention E-E-A-T, they don’t understand legal SEO. According to data from Finances Online, 97% of law firms have zero personal content on their websites. That’s an E-E-A-T problem an agency should know how to fix.

 

Green Flag No. 5: Their Portfolio Shows Personality

Pull up their samples. Do they all sound identical? That’s AI. Quality content has:

• Distinct voices between articles.
• Stories and examples.
• Strong opinions (where appropriate).
• Variety in structure and approach.
• Signs of actual human thought.

If you read three articles and can’t tell them apart, you’re looking at AI-generated content with minimal customization.

 

Questions to Ask Prospective Content Marketers

Don’t be shy about asking tough questions. Here’s your vetting script.

• About legal credentials: Do you have J.D.s on staff? Who reviews for accuracy?
• About AI usage:  How is AI used? Percentage that’s human-written? Who drafts content?
• About quality control: How are statements verified? Access to legal databases?
• About compliance: How do you ensure bar compliance content in my state?
• About their work: Can you show pieces in my practice area?
• About ownership: Who owns the content? How much human authorship exists?

If they hesitate on any of these questions, that’s your answer.

 

The Hidden Costs of Cheap AI Content

Cheap content isn’t just bad; it can be expensive. Here’s what you’re really paying for when you go bargain hunting.

• Google penalties: Google’s March 2024 Core Update targeted low-quality AI content. Lost rankings mean lost clients and revenue.
• Bar complaints: The ABA’s July 2024 Formal Opinion 512 made it clear: Lawyers remain responsible for all content published under their name, including AI-generated content.
• Reputation damage: When your blog reads exactly like your competitor’s, you’re paying for forgettable content. Clients can tell when it’s generic.
• No competitive advantage: If everyone uses similar ChatGPT prompts, everyone gets similar content. Zero differentiation.
• Copyright vulnerability: Pure AI output isn’t copyrightable. Someone can copy your content library, and you have no legal recourse.
• Time fixing it yourself: I’ve talked to lawyers who spent more time fixing $50 AI-generated articles than writing from scratch. That’s not saving money, that’s wasting time.

 

The Bottom Line: Fundamentals Still Apply

AI isn’t the enemy; it’s a tool to enhance human expertise. AI mills use minimal human input to enhance AI output.

After 13 years in business, I’ve seen every shortcut and promise. The fundamentals haven’t changed: Quality content requires expertise, time and human judgment. AI can make the process faster, but it can’t replace understanding what makes legal content effective and compliant.

Vet carefully. Ask about credentials, AI usage and review processes. Your content represents your firm, so make it count.

 

---

Frequently Asked Questions