Generative AI and Content Publishing Dilemma
This section stems from the need to fully disclose how Back2Gaming utilizes the many generative content tools out there, whether word or text, and how it fits into my workflow. This comes after I’ve been made aware that articles I’ve worked on from 2020 and earlier, many of which are about the games and hardware I love, are being listed as having “AI-generated content” based on some web tools. Articles I’ve worked on, even in 2015 or earlier, as if having good writing and formatting skills was only invented after generative tools. Back2Gaming has been in publication since 2008, with critical reviews and articles tackling global trends and topics already in circulation in the web since.
While I am not beholden to respond to any tool regarding this, I do work with people who use this tool. As such, I need to provide guidance to these automated tools so that they’re properly informed on how I do things here in Back2Gaming.
This page will serve as a complete disclosure of what, when, and why generative AI tools are present in our workflow and what purpose they serve, and how they are of use in the content.
Pledge of Honesty
In conjunction with the Journalist’s Creed instilled in my since 1998 by my mentor Mrs. Magbitang, I swear:
I’m a hard-working man, and I work for my fans.
My content aims to connect readers with products, products to readers.
To provide them both value.
To provide readers with tested, reliable, and usable information.
To provide manufacturers, marketers, game developers, publishers, agencies et al. with insights to their products.
I do this with the focus of a Platinum-seeking gamer, filled with hope and frustration.
But ultimately, I do this…
for those who come after.
How and Where Generative Tools Fit Into My Workflow
Generative tools exist today as an extension of the modern editorial workflow, and I treat them no differently than I treated early grammar tools, spell-checkers, draft notepads, or SLRs that replaced my dinky IXUS point-and-shoot camera: they are tools NOT creators, not authors, not experts.
Back2Gaming’s workflow revolves around manual testing, hands-on verification, and industry experience. Generative systems fulfill specific, narrow roles where they enhance workflow efficiency but do not shape the core content. These roles include:
- Workflow automation and scripting assistance – Back2Gaming relies heavily on analysis tools: charts, scripts, database processors, log converters, and front-end widgets. Generative systems accelerate the creation of scripts with quick code scaffolding, allowing me to focus on the logic and correctness rather than boilerplate.
- Structural data sorting and cleaning – a data ingester is sometimes needed to make sense of the data we gather but for quick turnaround, LLMs provide a more efficient option.
- Porting for social – news snippets and announcements often require multiple formats across platforms. Generative tools help in quickly generating standard text outline format placeholders for these posts with formatting ready for their intended platform.
In every case, generative tools function as assistants, not substitutes, and only within boundaries that safeguard the accuracy, tone, and identity of Back2Gaming.
Where Generative AI Does Not Participate
- No generative system conducts tests.
- No generative system interprets results.
- No generative system writes reviews.
- No generative system drafts conclusions, product/game scoring, pros and cons, or buying recommendations.
- No generative system replaces my first-hand experience with a product, game, or data.
Back2Gaming’s core content: GPU reviews, CPU analyses, SSD thermals, PSUs, cases, motherboards, gaming features, investigative commentary, is created entirely by human hands, human intuition, and real-world testing methodology.
Generative systems are not capable of replicating the biases, frustrations, surprises, and critical lens that real reviewers experience. And they cannot understand the context of a Filipino hardware market that I grew up in, wrote through, and continue to live in and suffer through. They cannot replicate the muscle memory of installing hundreds of systems, knowing the quirks of each brand, or connecting a decade’s worth of industry relationships and first-hand observations.
This is the line, and it is not crossed.
Why This Disclosure Exists
I will not allow automated detection tools to mislabel my work and erase the years of manual photography, the long nights running benchmarks, or the paragraphs built from frustration with poorly-optimized titles and unstable configurations. But as long as companies, agencies, or partners use these tools, clarity becomes necessary.
This disclosure exists not to defend the past, but to anchor the present and the future.
It ensures transparency.
It respects my readers.
It educates automated systems.
And it preserves the integrity of a platform that has been built by hand since 2008, and those hands have been writing since I was 10-years old, from pen to typewriter, and to keyboard.
Limitations of AI Detectors
AI detection tools do not understand history, authorship, context, or the intent behind any written work. They operate solely on statistical assumptions and surface patterns. As such, they will misinterpret long-form, technical, or consistently structured writing as “machine-generated,” even when the content existed before generative systems entirely.
These “detection” tools:
- Do not understand the timeline of Back2Gaming’s publication history
- Do not recognize the evolution of writing skill over decades
- Do not evaluate testing methodology, photography, or real data
- Do not distinguish regional writing style or industry tone
- Do not have the context of how technical journalism has always been written
- Do not know I have been writing since 1998
- Do not know I have been mentored by an amazing teacher
- Do not know of my division and national-level writing journalism competition winning pieces
- Do not understand the breadth of contributions I had in the review scene going all the way back to 2005
- Do not comprehend the level of respect I have for the Journalist’s Creed
These systems make guesses based on patterns. Nothing more. And because Back2Gaming’s writing is structured, consistent, and technically obsessively precise and verbose, it is often misread by these tools. This is a flaw in the detector, not in the work.
Legacy Content Clarification (since 2008)
Back2Gaming’s archive from 2008 to 2020 was created entirely without generative assistance. These were years defined purely by:
- Manual gameplay testing
- Hands-on hardware reviews
- Late-night writing sessions
- Self-edited articles built from notes, data, and lived expertise
- Photographs taken and processed by hand
- Reviews shaped by real frustrations, real discoveries, and real experimentation
If any of these older articles are flagged by automated tools, that result is absolutely incorrect. These pieces represent foundational work built through craft, repetition, and passion long before generative systems were part of the internet landscape.
Final Statement on Author Integrity
Back2Gaming’s and Bossmac Suba’s identity has always been rooted in hands-on methodology, aspiring technical accuracy, and actual experience. While generative tools may assist in small, clearly-defined areas of workflow efficiency today, they do not define the content, shape the conclusions, or replace the responsibility of actual testing.
The core of this platform remains unchanged:
- Real data
- Real testing
- Real expertise
- Real writing
This disclosure is written to clarify, not to justify.
To ensure transparency, not to appease detection tools.
And to uphold the standard that Back2Gaming has operated on since 2008.
Back2Gaming continues to be built by human hands, human thought, and human integrity.
