Two cyborg woman heads and circuit brain, mind control. Artificial Intelligence Encounter.This article is the third in my three-part AI Showdown series, a competition in which I put the top generative AI chatbots—ChatGPT, Claude, Bing Chat, and Bard—to the test for a content marketing use case.In the first piece, I introduced the AI Showdown contenders, covering how I use them, what I see as their weaknesses, and how you might use each tool for content marketing purposes.In the second piece, the showdown began. I walked through the process of asking ChatGPT, Claude, Bing, and Bard to write a blog post on a content marketing topic.Hint: I was surprised at the outcome!In this article, the final in the series, I share the rest of the showdown, in which I have the AI chatbots create Social Media Posts and an email designed to lead readers to click in and read the blog post from the AI Showdown, Part 2.Let’s dive right in.In this part of the experiment, I asked the chatbots to create social media posts.I didn’t want them to lose sight of the instructions from earlier conversations, so I prefaced my request for the posts with this text:Can you now write the social media posts to drive people to this blog post? I want one post each for LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. Recommend images and incorporate hashtags and emojis where appropriate.Let’s see how each chatbot performed.At first, ChatGPT provided me with CSS and other forms of code for the social media posts.ChatGPT's first output for the social media posts was code.That’s not what I wanted, so I asked it to rewrite without code.Image 1/2: Social media posts created by ChatGPTImage 2/2: Social media posts created by ChatGPTIn reviewing ChatGPT’s outputs, here’s what I found:Overall, I gave ChatGPT a passing grade—perhaps a B-minus. It’s not an “A” or possibly even a “B.” But I could work with the content, editing it and enriching it to make it better.Now, let’s see how Claude’s social content turned out.Claude jumped right in and provided its social content in seconds.Social media content created by Claude for the AI ShowdownPerhaps Claude finished so fast because the content was sparse. Here are my other findings:Claude disappointed me. The model is supposed to be more business-savvy than the others but failed to live up to its reputation.Next up—Bing Chat.Bing Chat blew me away with its blog post. Would it do the same with its social posts? I was eager to find out.Image 1/3: Social media posts for the AI Showdown created by Bing ChatImage 2/3: Social media posts for the AI Showdown created by Bing ChatImage 3/3: Social media posts for the AI Showdown created by Bing ChatI was immediately excited by the size of Bing’s response; it took three screenshots to show it all to you. Other findings:Overall, I was surprised by and happy with Bing’s output. Coming into this experiment, I considered Bing to be third on the usefulness hierarchy, with ChatGPT on top, followed by Claude and then Bing and Bard. But Bing provided the best blog post draft, and it won again with its social posts. Would Bing take home the crown? You’ll soon find out.First, though, look at Bard’s results.Bard has been an underperformer in every way and every experiment. Let’s see if it can create solid social media content.Social media posts created by Bard for the AI ShowdownBard hit one high note with its social content because it was the only chatbot to suggest headlines for its social posts. And those headlines are good because they speak to the benefits readers want—leads and sales.Here are my other thoughts about Bard’s performance:Overall, Bard did what it’s always done for me—fell flat.And the winner of the social media part of this competition is… Bing Chat.Although I expected ChatGPT to walk away with the social media content trophy, Bing Chat surprised me by coming out on top, primarily due to its ability to write with passion, making it sound more human—or at least more like this human.Which tools followed?Now, let’s see how the chatbots performed with the final element of the AI Showdown—an email to drive traffic to the blog post.As with the social posts, when I asked the chatbots to write the email, I gave them the same instructions:Great! Now, can you write the text of the email? I’ll send it to my tribe. The goal of the email is to drive people to the blog post. Let’s look at their outputs.ChatGPT’s email came in at 194 words, a good length for my list of busy executives and business owners.An email created by ChatGPT for the AI ShowdownChatGPT somewhat redeemed itself in my eyes because all my feedback was positive:However, the overall email is meh—average. There’s nothing offensive about it, but nothing great, either.Let’s see how Claude did.Claude’s email was also a short-enough length for busy readers.An email created by Claude for the AI ShowdownClaude’s email left me holding a mixed bag.Despite several negatives, Claude’s email still comes out on top over ChatGPT’s. I prefer its brevity, creativity, and tone.Let’s see how Bing Chat performed.After Claude’s email, I wondered if Bing might be about to lose the lead, having won both the blogging and social media elements of the AI Showdown.Also, because Bing’s email is double the word count of ChatGPT’s and Claude’s, I wondered whether the extra words would be worth it.An email created by Bing Chat for the AI ShowdownBing’s email has pros and cons:To answer my question from earlier, yes. The extra words from Bing were worth it. Even so, I still considered Claude in the lead because its email was shorter and more personable.Now, let’s turn our attention to the final contestant in the final competition of the three-part AI Showdown series.Bard’s email was the lightest, coming in at 149 words. Were those words useful?An email created by Bard for the AI ShowdownNo, I did not deem Bard’s words useful. Here’s the rest of my feedback:Bard, not surprisingly, lived up to my expectations of coming in last place.Although Bing and ChatGPT were closer competitors than they were in the blog-post and social-post writing challenges, neither pulled ahead of Claude. Claude wins first place this time, for all the reasons I outlined.But which AI chatbot won overall? There were four contestants, each performing three tasks. Let’s take a look.In this three-part series, I asked ChatGPT, Claude, Bing Chat, and Bard to write a blog post, along with social media content and an email to drive readers to that post.To determine the overall results, I assigned points to each placement. The winner of an individual challenge would receive 4 points. Second place would receive 3 points; third, 2 points; and fourth, 1 point. Then I tabulated the results, which follow.Results of the AI ShowdownBased on the total points, the overall winner was Bing Chat, with 11 points. ChatGPT and Claude both tied for 2nd place, with 8 points. And Bard brought up the rear with 3 points.The results were a surprise, as I hypothesized that ChatGPT would win, followed by Claude and then Bing Chat. I was confident that Bard would come in last place, which it did.Based on my experiences, including the experience of this AI Showdown, here’s how you can best use generative AI chatbots for content marketing purposes.Use ChatGPT to:Use Claude to:Use Bing Chat to:Use Bard to:The key is combining each system's strengths to enhance different parts of the content creation process, from generating ideas to drafting and refining.And never forget—your human creativity, critical thinking, and oversight are still essential for quality results.