FCA authorised · FRN 724952 0117 325 0027Quote & buy →
Aipedia: Marketing and PR agencies
AI-produced SEO content carries the same legal and contractual risks as any published content, multiplied by the volume agencies now produce. Errors, copied text and ranking drops can all turn into claims against the agency.
Part of: AI in Marketing and PR agencies
In short
Agencies can now generate hundreds of articles a month with AI, but promotional content is still judged under the ASA's media-neutral rules and the DMCC Act's ban on misleading actions. IPA/ISBA principles expect fact checking, respect for IP and transparency with clients about AI content. Possible problems include invented facts, near-copies of competitor text and clients blaming the agency for ranking falls. PI may respond to negligence or infringement claims, but guarantees, performance promises and fee disputes may be excluded, so contracts and process records matter.
Content marketing retainers once meant a handful of researched articles a month. With a generative AI chatbot, an agency can produce dozens of blog posts, location pages, product descriptions and FAQ blocks in a day. A typical workflow may generate an outline from keyword research, draft the article with AI, run a light edit and publish straight to the client's site. The volume is the selling point, and also the source of risk: errors, invented facts and near-copies of other sites' text are repeated at scale, under the client's name.
Blog and website content that promotes a client's goods or services is marketing, and the ASA applies its media-neutral rules to it whether a person or a model wrote it. Objective claims need evidence, and content must not mislead. Under section 226 of the DMCC Act 2024, an overall presentation likely to deceive the average consumer can be a misleading action even if each sentence is true, which matters for long AI articles that create a misleading impression through emphasis or omission.
The IPA/ISBA principles expect agencies to consider IP holders (principle 7), keep human oversight including fact checking (principle 10) and be transparent with clients about AI content (principle 11). An agency that sells "expert-written" articles but delivers lightly edited AI output risks a misrepresentation argument from its own client.
Illustrative scenario: an agency publishes 200 AI-written articles a quarter for a financial services client. One article misstates a tax allowance; another closely mirrors a competitor's guide. The competitor demands removal and costs. Months later the client's organic traffic drops sharply. The client blames the agency's "low-quality AI content", refuses to pay outstanding invoices and claims the cost of rewriting the site and lost leads.
Other patterns include fabricated quotes or sources, outdated regulatory information in sectors where accuracy matters, and content that makes medical, legal or financial claims a client is not permitted to make. Search engines may demote content they judge unhelpful, and while it is hard to prove why rankings fell, clients may see the agency as the obvious cause.
PI for agencies may respond to a client's claim that content was negligently produced, contained errors or infringed third-party rights, subject to the policy wording. Claims about results, such as "you promised page one rankings", are harder: some policies exclude guarantees, performance warranties and fee disputes, so the way you sell the service matters as much as the content itself. A competitor's copyright complaint may fall under IP or media cover if your policy includes it. Our guide to contract and performance disputes for digital agencies explains how these claims typically arise, and AI hallucination liability covers the specific problem of invented facts.
Long-form AI copy often contains product claims, so the substantiation points in AI copywriting and unsubstantiated claims apply here too, and content contracts should reflect AI clauses in agency client contracts. The marketing and PR agencies hub has the full series.
How Apex helps: Apex arranges PI for content and SEO agencies. A broker checks how your policy treats AI-produced content errors, infringement complaints and performance disputes.
A client can try, usually alleging negligence or breach of contract. Proving that particular content caused a ranking fall is difficult, but the dispute itself is costly. Avoiding guarantees and documenting your process helps both the defence and any PI claim.
Content promoting a business's goods or services is marketing, so the ASA's media-neutral rules can apply regardless of who wrote it. Claims need evidence and must not mislead. Purely editorial content may be treated differently, depending on the facts.
Yes. IPA/ISBA principle 11 expects transparency with partners and no AI-generated content in their materials without agreement. Not telling a client, especially when charging for expert writing, invites disputes and may undermine your position if a claim follows.
The owner of the original text may demand removal and claim for copyright infringement against the publisher, which can include the agency that supplied it. Similarity checks before publication are the main defence, and IP cover within a PI or media policy may respond, subject to its terms.
Tell us about your firm and the work you do. A broker will review how your current PI treats AI-assisted work, or arrange new cover. No fee for a quote. Or call 0117 325 0027.
Start a PI quote Request a callbackApex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England and Wales, company number 07014570. This page is general information about how AI is used in the profession and how insurance may respond. It is not legal, regulatory or insurance advice on your circumstances, and it does not guarantee that cover will be available or on what terms.
